LOL no. That’s called a home invasion robbery.
The cops aren’t doing an eviction for non-payment when they go arrest robbers. Here in California, at 9:10 am pdt April 27, 2020, home invasion robberies remain illegal, and the cops will respond to 911 calls regarding them.
OKVG.
So, could you work the issues you expressed above into the table I posted above? Would moving forward with the ‘argument’ this way work for you?
I am aware that the post you responded to was my stupid hypothetical not your stupid hypothetical. That was the point.
As of 9:24am PDT in California, it is the case that if you don’t pay your rent in September, you will likely be evicted.
Not really, my question to you is basically “how would any of this work” and I doubt you’ll answer.
I’m not making a hypothetical.
And I don’t understanding your hypothetical at all. Are you advocating home invasion robberies should be legalized ???/?
Again, you are asking me how right now today works. WTF. SMH.
I’m saying there is not a change in system status quo just because at the current snapshot in time people aren’t being evicted. Since the situation is predicated on the existence of future evictions.
Can you tell the future?
Homeowners, renters, architects, financiers, and I can all make educated predictions.
So current landlords would just keep maintaining apartments when folks don’t pay rent month after month? Would still advertise and fill vacancies with no expectation of rent? Seems dubious, idk.
You know, none of us have to use the term “status-quo” at all. Obviously this term has got the liberals all in a tizzy, so how about we just all agree to drop it altogether.
The Q facing us now is this: should renting folk allow the situation pre-pandemic be re-instated.
See… no use of the term “status-quo” needed at all !!!1!
Stop trolling !!!2
That’s true, you don’t know.Of course, nobody knows. That’s because (despite what some liberals ITT believe) nobody can tell the future. So I guess all these kinda questions will forever remain a mystery.
Examining the present however, isn’t quite as tricky.
I’m not a lawyer, so sue me if I go astray… but my understanding is a landlord has a common law, and often by statute, responsibility to provide a safe and usable product, even if he ends up not collecting back rent. Just like a car manufacturer has a responsibility to sell a safe and usable car, even if a buyer defaults on his car loan.
OTOH evictions for trashing the place are still in force. As for routine maintenance, well it’s a lot cheaper to hire the gardener directly -vs- paying the landlord’s usury markup for hiring him for you.
Without the threat of violence, landlords would be on the same footing as the owners of the credit card companies. Unlike store cards, in general general credit card owners cannot repossess. They can however blacklist (poop on your credit score), and seek a judgment to garnish wages. When we examine reality today, we find that the owners of credit card companies are doing very well with their rent-seeking scam, TYVM, even thought they have to write off a certain percentage as noncollectable.
I don’t think we need to cry tears because the poor poor landlords have been reduced to the same level as the credit card company owners.
So, keep landlords, forbid evictions, let landlords garnish wages/ruin credit scores/blacklist deadbeat tenants? Doesn’t seem like much of a difference to me.
Less violence, less homelessness.
Sabo’s theories do sound a lot more reasonable if you absolve yourself of any need to think about the future.
These credit card companies, do they keep providing money after the debt becomes delinquent? If the only issue is “violence,” are we fine with landlords changing the locks and leaving the clothes/furniture outside as soon as the tenant leaves the house? Just simply a stop to the provision of service.
In addition we’d have to calculate the rent hike that corresponds to the average credit card interest rate.
Well, if I buy a tv on a general credit card, and I stop paying those suckers, I still get to watch tv. So if you consider watching tv as “keep providing money” the answer is “yes”.
Gotta love posting memes while being unable to follow your own basic analogy. A TV is something that you buy once whereas rent is something you pay every month. What happens to your leased car if you stop making payments on it?
Get a job and stop trolling !!!2