• moody@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    9 months ago

    While I do agree with your point, individuals aren’t buying hundreds or thousands of properties. It’s corporations buying up a limited resource that are driving up the prices, not I-own-three-houses landlords.

    • Misconduct@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      Nah, I’m gonna go ahead and still be mad at both despite them being different degrees of bullshit. Thanks.

    • Worx@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      An individual landlord isn’t buying hundreds of properties, but hundreds of individual landlords (all saying “it’s not my fault, I only own three houses!”) are buying hundreds of properties.

      Even if each individual landlord is a good person who’s going to heaven, they still make the housing market worse for everyone else. Their interests are directly opposed to working class people.

      • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        9 months ago

        There is demand for houses for rent by private landlords. Many people don’t want to rent in a multi unit from a large company, especially in lower income areas. Buying isn’t really a good option short term, especially in lower income areas, as houses don’t appreciate in those areas as much as in higher cost of living areas. If you’re planning on living somewhere for only a few years, then it doesn’t make sense to buy a house.

        • Worx@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          In the current system, what you’re saying is true. However, if we think of a system where each person can only own one or two houses by law, and houses are therefore much cheaper, buying for a short time wouldn’t be as bad. Potentially there could be a couple of houses owned by each city council to rent out in the short term for people who don’t want to buy.

          If we want to be radical (which I do), make housing a right and guarantee it for every citizen. Abolish capitalism and the profit motive for owning multiple houses. Whole system’s fucked as it is right now.

          • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            9 months ago

            You will still have costs associated with owning a house such as maintenance and repairs. If you buy a house and then have to put a roof/furnace/ major repair then you lost money if you only own the house for a few years.

            • hark@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              I had a new furnace put in last year and the cost was less than a month’s rent. Granted, I “knew a guy” but still, the quotes I got from others were two months of rent or less and you’re not going to replace a furnace every year or anything close to that. I’m not renting btw, this was for my own house. I don’t like the idea of being a landlord.

                • hark@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Rent is $3000 a month around here. Mortgages aren’t a fair comparison since there are many factors in reducing that monthly payment. One problem I’ve heard of is people being denied on their mortgage application because they supposedly don’t make enough or have good enough credit so they’re stuck making much more expensive rent payments instead. Check out the rental market near you, it’s likely more expensive than your mortgage payment.

                  • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    It is, that’s one reason why I bought a house. But a decent rental isn’t over $2k/ mo here. You could probably find a decent house for rent for $1200.

                    The lender said he’d never seen a perfect credit score before me. They approved me for double what I was willing to spend and I only have a factory job. If you can’t be responsible enough to have a decent credit score, then owning a house isn’t for you either.

            • Worx@lemmynsfw.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              Again, I agree with you in the current system - assuming you have a landlord who upholds their end of the bargain and does maintenance. In my ideal world though, you’d just hit up your neighbours and they’d help you fix the problem because they know you’ll be there for them when they need it and because money is obsolete.

    • BlanketsWithSmallpox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      But setting policies to help renters in need without hurting landlords is complicated. Landlords aren’t a homogenous group of faceless corporations. In fact, fewer than one-fifth of rental properties are owned by for-profit businesses of any kind. Most rental properties – about seven-in-ten – are owned by individuals, who typically own just one or two properties, according to 2018 census data. And landlords have complained about being unable to meet their obligations, such as mortgage payments, property taxes and repair bills, because of a falloff in rent payments.

      https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/08/02/as-national-eviction-ban-expires-a-look-at-who-rents-and-who-owns-in-the-u-s/

      • Wrench@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I’m not disagreeing, but 2018 census data may not be relevant anymore. There has been an absolute feeding frenzy since the lockdown. The landscape has definitely changed.

          • Wrench@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            Outdated data is irrelevant. 2018 was before the housing shortage, before wealthy hedge funds started buying up real estate en masse, before real estate corps employed AI to buy real estate, before airbnbs became egregious to the point of legislation like above.

            Quality and relevancy of data is important. You would roll your eyes at anyone citing 1920s census figures. Yes, that’s a dramatic exaggeration, but it makes the point.

            A lot has changed in real estate in the last 5 years. That’s the entire basis of the housing crisis discussion as a whole.

            • BlanketsWithSmallpox@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              … Unlike every other housing bubble both local or worldwide that happens every 15 years or so?

              https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real-estate_bubble

              E:

              Quality and relevancy of data is important. You would roll your eyes at anyone citing 1920s census figures. Yes, that’s a dramatic exaggeration, but it makes the point…A lot has changed in real estate in the last 5 years.

              … Wow.