Comment on Landlords are parasites

Rachelhazideas@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

• mathemachristian@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  All landlords are parasites. Paying a landlord is not the same as having home insurance…

  source

  • Rachelhazideas@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Home insurance does not cover costs associated with maintenance and negligence.

    Your sewer line failing because it’s 50 years old and made of cast iron is not a valid home insurance claim.

    source

    • mathemachristian@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Ok? A landlord is still no substitute for actual insurance

      source
    • disguistingProp@sh.itjust.works ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      And the cost of renovating doesn’t even compare to what the landlord makes for sitting on his ass

      source
  • titanicx@lemmy.zip ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Nah. I’ve been renting where I’m at for over a decade. My landlord has been amazing. I’ve had times where I’m out of work and he’s allowed me to be 2 months late paying, I’ve had hard times and he’s helped out, he let’s me do what I want with the place and he foots the bill. He’s also only raised my rent in that 11 years by 125$. I’ve also seen his house, and it’s worse off then mine. My truck is better then his as well. Not all landlords are the same. Some actually do want to help as much as they can.

    source

    • mathemachristian@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      They’re still getting your money for little to no work. You’re helping house and feed them in order to have access to their private property. As in, you are creating value through your labor, and have to exchange some of that value you created with your landlord for access to private property. Your landlord granting you access doesn’t create value and yet you have to pay for it. At the end of the day, they still have a property that has an exchange value and you had to trade some of the value you created for nothing. It’s consumed. It’s gone.

      source
    • Socialism_Everyday@reddthat.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I’m genuinely happy for you getting a good landlord, but access to housing shouldn’t be conditioned by being lucky to get a decent and altruistic landlord (a minority in people’s experience, hence the massive upvotes of the post).

      source
• ranzispa@mander.xyz ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Rented a flat from a family for 3 years. The flat had not been renewed in over 60 years, but I was alright with that. The flat had several problems, they never wanted to fix.

  One day the electrical system starts going out over and over again, fuses would burn every few days. I had to tell them that in case of fire they’d be responsible for everything I had in the house before they agreed they should fix the electric system.

  Since they were going to fix the electric system, they decided to do a bit more work and change the floor and a few things more. They wanted to increase the rent 50% to account for these improvements; even though that is illegal I accepted, since they were in fact improving the flat.

  I had to move out for two months while the works were going on. One week before the end of the works, the flat was really not done yet. I asked several times whether it would be ready, because I’d need to find and accomodation in the meanwhile. I asked for a discount of half a month so that I could cover expenses and because nobody knew when they would actually complete the works.

  The day before I was supposed to get back into the flat, they decided that I was posing way too many conditions and kicked me out. They decided to keep the safety deposit because a plastic floor old over 60 years had started cracking. 8 months later, they still have some boxes of stuff which is mine but never have time to meet me to give it back to me.

  Time has passed and I still have to go to a lawyer, because I the meanwhile I had a bunch of trouble to solve. I’m sure I can win a trial against them, but even if I do win the trial I’ll have gone through a bunch of trouble just to get my safety deposit back. I’ll be doing it just because they need to fuck off, but still…

  Now, most people renting places were I live are exactly like this. It is not big corporations, it people who got one or maybe a few flats on rent.

  source
• Soup@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Renting is important to have available but it absolutely does not need to be at the level its at. The amount of people paying for someone else’s investment while wishing they could own something of their own is crazy and it’s insane that we’ve normalized that. And all the while they’re just hoping nothing goes wrong because it seems like even the “good” landlords are hit-or-miss when it comes to getting them to do literally anything. Mine’s usually pretty good but right now there’s a fucking hole in the foundation and getting them to properly address it is a hurdle I shouldn’t have to go through. In order for these buildings to be profitable the tenants need to not only pay for those issues you mentioned but now they’re also paying for someone else’s salary AND in the end that person gets to sell the building and keep all that money, too.

  The reason the housing market is fucked in the US and Canada is becauss there are very few rent controls and a lot of the power sides with the landlords. In Montréal you have to be worried about going taking them to court because future landlords can just look up if you’ve ever done anything and deny you a place to live even if the problem was your current landlord is dogshit. Oh, and there’s a new law that’s around landlords being able to use necessary renovations as excuses to raise your rent! They have all the power and it doesn’t matter if they’re big or small, it’s a “business” that attracts the kind of people who don’t mind making easy money off of making you pay for their stuff.

  Your landlord(probably) isn’t going to let you hit it because you’re glazing them on Lemmy. Stand up for yourself and others, even if you got lucky with a landlord who is considered good because they don’t throw a hissy fit when you ask them to do their fucking job.

  source
• whoisearth@lemmy.ca ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  You’re getting flack but you’re not wrong. When I moved into my current house I was a landlord for over 3 years adopting the basement tenant already in the house. Rent was well below market rate and I never raised it. We were both respectful. Ultimately I terminated their lease because I have kids that are getting older and I need the extra space as well as just not in the mental headspace to rent my basement anymore. I’ve since gutted it with the intention of making it a proper finished basement for us all to enjoy.

  I gave them over 3 months notice. First month rent back and provided references.

  Some of us just want to do good.

  source

  • Socialism_Everyday@reddthat.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    I’m glad you’re a human with empathy and good intentions, but tenants shouldn’t be in a position that their housing (one of the most fundamental rights of people) relies on the good will of whatever landlord they happen to be stuck with.

    source
• Socialism_Everyday@reddthat.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Pretending that small landlords and corporate landlords are the same is like saying your local grocer is as bad as Walmart

  Your comparison is valid, but it works against your interests. Your local grocer, as a business owner, is every bit against rising minimum wage as Walmart is: both of them see reduced profits when minimum wages are increased, so the class relations between them and their workers make them support anti-worker-rights policy.

  In the same manner, your local landlord has every reason to be as opposed to measures such as rent caps or rent freezes as BlackRock.

  Yes, rent should exist as an alternative to home ownership, but the housing for rent should be publicly owned and rented at maintenance-cost prices as has been done successfully in many socialist countries before that managed to abolish homelessness. As an example, by the 1970s rent in the Soviet Union costed about 3% of the monthly average income.

  source

  • papertowels@mander.xyz ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    both of them see reduced profits when minimum wages are increased

    But one doesn’t have to act in the shareholders best interest.

    My friends are renting in an apt from a mom and pop landlord who hasn’t raised the price in years - they roughly play half of what market price is at this point.

    So sure, the direction of Mom and pop landlords interests may be the same as a corporate landlords, but that are under much less pressure to leverage that.

    source

    • Zink@programming.dev ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      From the perspective of the MBAs and economists, small landlords being nice like that is just an inefficiency that the invisible hand of the market will eventually sweep away in favor of cold efficient corporate management.

      It seems to be that a local landlord is basically just a mom and pop shop that hasn’t closed down yet because it only needs to find one customer to buy its one service.

      source
    • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Whether or not a small business owner is for or against raising wages depends entirely on their own ethical compass, and whether that compass is strong enough to turn away from the temptation of extra profit. It’s rare that individuals are so altruistic to be able to fully turn off the impulse for profit incentive and personal enrichment.

      In contrast, a worker owned coop would not have that issue, as all workers would have equal incentive to raise wages as much as is reasonable while still maintaining the ability for the coop to thrive. Their individual ethics or moral compass wouldn’t factor in nearly as much.

      source

      • tankfox@midwest.social ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        You could manage it with some kind of benevolent Home Owners Association! That always works fantastically!

        source
      • Socialism_Everyday@reddthat.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Thanks for your insightful responses to the replies of my comment, I won’t respond to them because you already perfectly explained it. Good work, comrade

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • papertowels@mander.xyz ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Worker owned coops equivalent for housing is a housing coop complex, which I believe is the most sustainable model of housing.

        However, I’m not sure how that would apply to single detached houses.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• return2ozma@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Housing is a human right, not an investment. Nationalize housing

  source

  • Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Based

    source

    • eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Ozma always is!

      source
  • Rachelhazideas@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Socialized housing isn’t an overnight project. It starts with regulating the current housing marketing and prioritizing the take down of corporate slumlords. It starts with revising zoning laws, promoting higher density housing and multifamily homes, and creating walkable and accessible neighborhoods for all.

    I get the idealism from Lemmy, but this is also it’s pitfall. Anything less than a leftist utopia is not worth working towards, and so we sit in righteous inaction.

    source

    • Socialism_Everyday@reddthat.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      It’s not a utopia, housing has been nationalized successfully in several countries, with the result of the abolition of homelessness, extremely affordable rent (think 3% of monthly incomes), and evictions essentially not existing.

      source

      • Rachelhazideas@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        History is path dependent. Not every country has the same literacy rates, civic participation, income inequality, intergenerational wealth, social inertia, and so on.

        What is rational and common place in one country is radical progressivism in another.

        You can do what is ideal, or you can do what works. You can deny a reality of systemic barriers to affordable housing, or accept that they are real and must be tackled one at a time.

        In an ideal world, yes, there would be no landlords. In the real world, property, laws, the economy, and people are so deeply intertwined that to propose the elimination of landlords is about as facetious as eliminating bankers because of exploitation in banking.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • whoisearth@lemmy.ca ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Housing is a human right, not an investment.

    Yes and yes 1000%

    Nationalize housing

    Fuck no.

    source

    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      do you have any actual argument for why it’s bad?

      source

      • whoisearth@lemmy.ca ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Based on human nature over thousands of years the prevailing history shows us that “we” do not want to administer what we build. Governments worldwide forever have struggled with Capex vs Opex.

        For that reason, I do not want government getting into the habit of owning shit. Look at Russia or anywhere in the eastern block for the infrastructure that is literally crumbling. It’s all because we do not do Opex. We never have and nothing tells me we ever will. Working in corporate I can tell you it’s a struggle there too. Human nature does not prioritize Opex.

        So the question is, how would this be any different?

        I personally believe the government should be building more housing not the market because the market wants money and some things like starter homes do not make money. That does not mean I want the government owning and administering homes. Build them, sell them in the market and let the people who own it decide what to do.

        Do not let non-citizens or businesses in any way own anything.

        Government should be putting in place the rules and enforcing them but that’s it. The problem is they don’t want to enforce shit.

        There’s the other issue. People are lazy AF and what’s worse is most people refuse to acknowledge it which means most people are hypocrisy too lol

        source
    • Socialism_Everyday@reddthat.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Why not though? The experiments done in housing nationalization have been extremely successful in abolishing homelessness and guaranteeing access to affordable housing. In Cuba, if you study in (completely free) public university, the state assigns you a flat at no cost. In the Soviet Union, housing used to cost 3% of monthly incomes back in the 1970s.

      Imagine the possibilities that we could get with 50+ years of technological and industrial development if we nationalized housing in the west…

      source
    • return2ozma@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Social housing in Vienna

      youtu.be/41VJudBdYXY

      source

      • whoisearth@lemmy.ca ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Ok? That’s not all housing which to me is nationalizing. All countries have some concept of co-op or subsidized housing which is owned and administered by the government. It can and does exist in parallel. Should the government be doing more of it? I would argue yes.

        source