I think much worse, although I’d be interested to hear the opinion of someone who disagrees.
I think that an individual landlord tends to have a more directly negative impact on people’s lives than an individual who has like 3 shares of AMZN or BP in his 401k. Contributing a tiny bit to corporate evil deeds or a lot to the year to year finances/wealth of someone with less money than you.
They almost are, property taxes increase but they just pass that burden onto the tenant and their workload stays unaffected while the tenant might have to pick up more hours for the landlords property taxes going up. Most of the time landlords use 2-2.5% increases (which is what it has been in Chicago the last couple of years) as a justification to raise a tenants rent 5-10% so they make a profit off of the property tax increase too.
I was mostly being snarky. When they rent their property, they are landlords and they pass the property taxes on to their renters. When they’re not renting, they’re not landlords. Your post was better.
The end game is something akin to communal ownership of all lands. A rebuke of manifest destiny as it were.
You’re comparing a $6000 or $80 investment to owning income property?
But dollar for dollar I don’t think renting apartments is more immoral than a lot of businesses and I don’t think owning a small share of a large enterprise is the least bit mitigating. On the contrary, I think investing in a REIT or whatever is worse than putting the same money into something you are more responsible for. It’s worse to profit while taking no involvement or responsibility.
[quote="catfacemeowmers, post:58, topic:1424
Every single bit of legitimate work that is done regarding rental housing is typically done by working folk earning wages. Landlordism claims to “do” all this crap. It has nothing to do with any of it at all.
[/quote]
I wish I had known for all of those years I owned and actively managed an apartment building that I could’ve just let the residents collectively deal with repairs, snow removal, deciding among themselves how to fill empty apartments, etc.
What you’re describing as your ideal is what happens when people live in shantytowns.
You keep saying that, but seem to be ignoring the part where if the market could sustain a 10% increase, why would they need to use an increase in property taxes as an excuse? Just raise rents.
Landlords charge the rent that the market has determined it can sustain. If the goal is to make rent as cheap as possible, then you introduce all sorts of other weird problems, none of which are to the benefit of a tenant.
Yeah it’s crazy imagine a world where people have to plow their own driveway
If your tenants did all of that collectively what use is there for a landlord?
Not really fair to shantytowns. There are places where that sort of thing happens and it’s not awful, but a fundamental problem with residents self-managing is that it’s hard to get anyone to invest much into the properties when they are under constant threat of police throwing everyone out and the structures getting bulldozed.
There wouldn’t be. Then it would be more like a condo/co-op situation. But apartment buildings just don’t spring up out of thin air–unless we want to move to a situation where only the government can own and operate rental units.
In addition, if people could live in a decent apartment rent-free, why would most people pay a mortgage to live in a house?
Individuals can invest in REITs in a variety of different ways, including purchasing shares of publicly traded REIT stocks, mutual funds
According to the old TV commercials, a baby can invest in a residential REIT from their crib. It’s that easy. There is no work involved. That’s Landlordism.
So, let’s say I invest like $X million in a REIT, I’m now a Landlord. Fine, Let’s say, absent a pandemic or such, the profits are rolling in. Life is good. I don’t have to work. But I get bored sometimes. I like gardening. And I like going out with fellow workers for some beers after work. So I take a job at a gardening service. Fine.
So, I’m a Landlord (via the RIET), and I’m a professional gardener. Fine, Obviously my being a Landlord, and my being a gardener, have nothing to do with each other. With me so far?
So, let’s say one day, the gardening service sends my crew to work on one of the rentals my REIT owns. What happens now ???/? ZOMG have I crossed the streams. Am I now “creating” well tended gardens, because I’m using my super-hero powers as a Landlord !!!1! Shazam… Landlord-man “creates” by the magical secret hidden hand !
What a bunch of crap. This shiz always makes me want to puke,
Well they wouldn’t be living rent free. They would still have costs but the additional landlord premium wouldn’t be added into their rent cost. Some people like paying that premium and having someone do all of that and some don’t. Also sometimes that landlord cost is way too high for services given and the tenants do not have too much power or say in a lot of those situations
So should we increase protections for tenants or should we “abolish” “landlords”?
edited out the “” before you replied -_-
At the very least increase protections and then let’s see where we go from there
Sure, no matter what the defenders of Landlordism would have us believe, Landlordism doesn’t “create” housing. Landlordism doesn’t have anything to do with building houses at all.
Construction workers build housing. As for “springing up”, well there’s these folks…
3 hours, 26 minutes and 34 seconds
Stop compromising they should be abolished
Marinaleda is a better example that Habitat for Humanity (though they are cool too).
I know this thread is full of people posting constantly in the personal finance thread trying to take advantage of the current situation, but here’s a hot take for you; passive income itself is immoral. Tying it to someone’s domicile is obviously another level of awfulness, but making heaps on compounding interest and being able to retire when you’re 40 because you were childless and invested 70% of your income for years in index funds, while all essential workers in our economy have no concept of savings, retirement or passive income in general is completely fucked.
Late stage capitalism is the real issue here. Sure, landlords are scum and they’ll probably get bailed out like most other businesses (mbn investing with literally no downside), but they’re hardly unique in their shiftiness. I’d personally have bankers much higher on my guillotine list.