What’s weird to me is that the first one pays for their vacations and the second one pays their mortgage. If I had rental properties I would do it the other way around.
Fucking leeches
Submitted 1 day ago by Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com to aboringdystopia@lemmy.world
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/pictrs/image/3ec36227-4372-4d2d-8466-73091720d54a.webp
Comments
LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 1 day ago
henfredemars@infosec.pub 1 day ago
The type that looks up to Clarance Thomas.
Stovetop@lemmy.world 1 day ago
And if you do really well, you might even be able to get Clarence Thomas to look up to you!
Nastybutler@lemmy.world 1 day ago
ITT: people who want free housing without understanding the costs of owning a house
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 hours ago
Or maybe just quality, affordable, public housing?
Look at what Finland has done for an example.
jerkface@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
Imagine that, people in the wealthiest nations in the world, wanting to meet their basic needs for survival with dignity. Ha ha ha, when will they ever learn, right my friend?
commander@lemmings.world 22 hours ago
Owning a house isn’t that expensive.
I own one. It’s so much cheaper than renting it’s not even funny. I could pay someone to do all the work I don’t want to and still come out so far ahead it’s not even funny.
Renting is a scam for useful idiots.
Nastybutler@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
Well I hope nothing ever goes wrong with your house’s roof or siding or HVAC or foundation or plumbing or electrical or…
BombOmOm@lemmy.world 10 hours ago
Owning a house isn’t that expensive. It’s so much cheaper than renting
The good thing is, people who don’t want to rent can buy. I highly encourage people to do exactly that.
humanspiral@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
The appropriate criticism here is about corrupt markets resulting from restricted/scarce housing supply. Fair markets that encourage abundant housing supply, are ones that would lead to “perfect competition” and fair ROI on capital. The oligarchist/capital supremacy model of US/west corrupts markets against abundance, because extortionist profits fund politicians to protect extortionist profits.
UBI, not democracy, is the important freedom that can address structural corruption, but still the option to rent still needs to pay for the capital/expense investment in allowing you to rent.
Samskara@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
corrupt markets resulting from restricted/scarce housing supply
Housing has a hard limit as there is only so much ground available in desirable locations. Building houses also needs resources and labor and takes a while.
humanspiral@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
We can go pretty high, but 3-5 stories has easier construction, and doesn’t need expensive elevator system. 4th and 5th floor without an elevator advantages young people, but reduced rent still can be profitable vs stopping at 3 stories.
programmer_belch@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
TenantSlavelepinkainen@lemmy.world 1 day ago
If nobody is allowed to own more than one property, should everyone be forced buy? Where would renters get apartments from?
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 hours ago
Look into public housing in Finland.
lepinkainen@lemmy.world 10 hours ago
I am from Finland and public housing is shit.
Xhead@lemmings.world 1 day ago
A functioning government?
Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee 1 day ago
Ah, so the government is your landlord now?
It’s good, because Americans have so much trust in their government right now.
Maalus@lemmy.world 1 day ago
No rentals, houses will be gifted to everyone and magically conjured out of thin air.
sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz 1 day ago
Your sarcastic inability to see a different path does not mean a different path doesn’t exist.
ArchRecord@lemm.ee 1 day ago
Government-provided housing, social housing where your payments get you partial collective ownership, cheaper mortgages now that landlords aren’t artificially inflating the rates?
dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 1 day ago
The government. They used to provide housing in the UK and then they stopped and stopped building new houses and now they’re unattainable for most.
starshipHighwayman69@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
Yeah some people desire to be exploited! Send those kids back into the mines! /S
lepinkainen@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Can you give me a serious answer without the /s
If I inherit my grandmas apartment, can I put it up for rent since it’s in small apartment in a college town and there will be takers.
Or should I sell it so I don’t become a “landlord”, which is bad?
Should all students just buy an apartment for the 4-5 years they spend in the city or will the city be the landlord for them somehow collectively? Or is it less bad if the college is the landlord by offering student housing?
hedhoncho@lemm.ee 1 day ago
As a former property manager my motto was rent until you can own. I hate the 4 percent rent increase in la. Even if there’s more income it’s impossible for young people to save and I hate it.
commander@lemmings.world 22 hours ago
Even if there’s more income it’s impossible for young people to save and I hate it.
That’s the point. It’s why I always laugh whenever someone says “they’re a business and they need to make money!”
It’s like, that money is just going to the landlords of their employees more often than not. We can hopefully see how that rhetoric is a roundabout way of defending the profits of people taking advantage of us.
The working class has really sold itself out.
Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
Nobody likes a cheater.
finitebanjo@lemmy.world 1 day ago
In this specific example the 4 rental homes likely don’t even pay for themselves. Add up the mortgage, insurance, maintenance averages, and property taxes then divide by units and subtract the average rent (include vacancies in the average): that’s how much you make per tenant.
At most I could see a profitable location with 4 units covering groceries and vehicles, but not vacations. You would need more like 8 or 9 units for that.
This meme seems to specifically target mom & pop level operations. If the Tenants are really such victims they should just get together buy the property out.
thisfro@slrpnk.net 1 day ago
If the Tenants are really such victims they should just get together buy the property out.
If they could do that, they could probably buy a better place and wouldn’t have to live there.
finitebanjo@lemmy.world 1 day ago
And if they can’t do that then there are no alternatives to either renting or homelessness.
commander@lemmings.world 22 hours ago
🥱
This person has no idea what he’s talking about and we should all ignore him accordingly.
Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
Question - is it unethical to be a landlord IF your only rental properties are garages in an area with plentiful and free street parking, and the land couldn’t be used for housing if the garages were torn down?
Agent641@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Renting out commercial properties are not a problem. Nobody needs a warehouse or an office or a hard stand to live. Most businesses either buy their own property or they need the flexibility to outgrow small offices, or to rent a hard stand for a few months or years.
Renting out residential property iis parasite behaviour.
thisfro@slrpnk.net 1 day ago
the land couldn’t be used for housing
why not?
But generally yes, garages are less of a problem. But there is no ethical renting (under capitalism).
Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
It’s a 12ft by 20ft garage on a tiny subdivision of a house’s plot of land. Not zoned for housing and not large enough to even fit a mobile home. Just cut off of someone’s backyard.
earphone843@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
Every job involves having other people pay for your living costs.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 hours ago
My job doesn’t involve making a profit off of arguably the most important thing a human needs for survival… Just saying.
earphone843@sh.itjust.works 13 hours ago
So you have a problem with farmers?
ArchRecord@lemm.ee 1 day ago
The key difference is that these goods and services wouldn’t exist if you were not paid to do the job.
If landlords didn’t exist, then all housing would either be government-distributed, socially-owned, or obtained through mortgages.
If the workers building those houses didn’t exist, then the house wouldn’t either.
The only difference between a system for housing with a landlord, and one without a landlord, is that the landlord is an intermediary that shaves some money off the top any time money is used to pay for housing, even when the building is already fully paid off, or they aren’t there, and your money just covers the cost of construction and maintenance directly.
Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.net 1 day ago
___
Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.net 1 day ago
Where are you Mario?
commander@lemmings.world 22 hours ago
Got ratted out by a mcdonald’s worker.