No one wants to rent. Sure landlords serve a purpose in this capitalist hellhole, but if people could live in a single family home that they own most would take that option to rather than be beholden to some shithead that takes a 3rd of your income and just brings you problems
Comment on Brave truth teller.
EatYouWell@lemmy.world 7 months agoNo, they aren’t. Not everyone wants the hassle of owning and maintaining a property, or going a few hundred grand in debt to buy a non-liquid asset.
Apartments and rental units do serve a purpose.
Chocrates@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Knightfox@lemmy.one 6 months ago
While it’s true that it would be better for them in the long term, it’s also true that some people prefer convenience.
I have a coworker that pays the power company extra each month so that if her water heater does they’ll replace it for her. Why the fuck does the power company offer this service and by the time shee needs one she will have more than paid for one.
Lots of people don’t change their own oil in their cars, it’s easy and cheaper, but people don’t want to do it.
Coffee… that’s all I’m gonna say on that topic.
Renting is a service some people want, just like some people want to live in an HOA.
More people would probably buy a house if they could just pay the mortgage, similar to a rent to own setup, but that’s not an option available to most people.
Beelzebabe@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Wouldn’t the convenient (and cheaper) situation here not be to rent, but to own and hire a handyman when needed? I’m just not sure how a landlord offers any kind of convenience to anyone. (Maybe there’s something I’m missing of course.)
Knightfox@lemmy.one 6 months ago
You are absolutely correct, but it still requires making calls, coordinating with a handyman, being available when they come by, etc. It’s the same logic for why some landlords hire property managers. If being a landlord is so easy you’d think they wouldn’t need to hire someone to specifically manage their properties.
goetzit@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Not everyone, but the vast majority of everyone, and even those who don’t want to buy would still probably be better off with owning instead of renting.
“Going a few hundred grand in debt to buy a non-liquid asset” a house is probably the best asset you could buy for yourself, and also, do you think you’re saving money renting? Do you think a landlord is losing money on his mortgage? You’re covering the mortgage anyway, and then a premium for not having it in your name.
goldenbough@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Renting over owning is a more stable outlay (no “surprise, you need a new water heater” expenses for renters) and it gives flexibility for moving with any kind of frequency. I agree that home ownership should be more attainable and affordable, but it’s not a clean win 100% of the time for everyone.
Arbiter@lemmy.world 7 months ago
You’re still paying for the water heater, the expense is just hidden over long term inflated rent prices.
goldenbough@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Yes, a bigger built into the rental price (“inflated” is a loaded term; rents can be inflated, but a rental price set to cover mortgage and amortized expenses isn’t by definition inflated), but it’s still stable.
sukhmel@programming.dev 7 months ago
Yeah, also way more stable in countries where you are not protected by the law and may be told get outta the property you’re renting less than a month in advance. And in countries where you’re protected, the landlord will usually get in your arse checking if you’re a fraud, this makes renting quite a bit more of a problem.