562
Landlords didn't get their job for their brains, also ALAB. (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 years ago by BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world to c/microblogmemes@lemmy.world
106 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Censored@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

What value does Jim-bob owning 5 homes and renting them out to make a living add to the tenants?

  • The tenants are able to live in a house that they can't afford to buy because they don't have credit and credentials that satisfy the bank.
  • The tenants are able to move out with a couple months notice if they get a job elsewhere. They don't have to worry about selling the house or finding a way to pay double mortgages when they move elsewhere.. Or, worse, taint their souls by renting out their extra house while waiting for the housing market to improve.
  • The tenants money is not tied up in a property, they are able to invest it in the stock market which has a higher rate of return than home ownership (which only keeps pace with inflation on average, per Case Schiller).
  • The tenants don't have to worry about having money or credit reserved to cover unexpected costs, like the new water heater breaking a year after it was installed.
  • The tenants don't get constant calls from scammers claiming they want to py your property for CASH TODAY.

Just a few thoughts.

[-] BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

The tenants are able to live in a house that they can’t afford to buy because they don’t have credit and credentials that satisfy the bank.

So they should pay the same expenses, PLUS extra to support the landlord who could meet the bank's criteria for a loan?

The tenants are able to move out with a couple months notice if they get a job elsewhere. They don’t have to worry about selling the house or finding a way to pay double mortgages when they move elsewhere…

They also don't have to worry about cashing in on the appreciated value of the house since they moved in...

The tenants money is not tied up in a property, they are able to invest it in the stock market which has a higher rate of return than home ownership (which only keeps pace with inflation on average, per Case Schiller).

Funny joke. My parents bought a house for $90,000 in 1993 that is worth ~$400,000+ today. What percentage of investments could offer such a yield in the same time-frame?

The tenants don’t get constant calls from scammers claiming they want to pay your property for CASH TODAY.

I still get those same scam calls despite not being a homeowner.

Got anything else?

[-] Censored@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago

Obviously there has to be an incentive for Jim-bob to tie up his retirement savings and credit worthiness in a house that he doesn't live in. You may not like the fact that people have to qualify for bank loans to buy property, but this is the world we live in. Especially if you happen to be an undocumented immigrant.

Oh, your anecdotal evidence about your parent's home surely beats my Nobel-prize winning economics study citation. Lucky for your parents they didn't have to sell it in 2010. Because I have anecdotal evidence for someone who bought a house for $400k in 2004 and then later sold it for $280k after the real estate crash.

Also the increasing property value you mention is due to regulatory capture by home owners who prevent the construction of new rental properties for fear it will "hurt their home value." Combined with a mass exodus out of the rural areas into urban areas that are not building homes or city infrastructure fast enough to keep up with the increase in residents in the short run, which results in increased prices for homes in the city until those issues are addressed.

None of these things are "working as intended."

No, you get different scam calls which you assume are the same but are definitely not, since these ones just go out to names on lists of property owners, not random residents.

[-] BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Obviously there has to be an incentive for Jim-bob to tie up his retirement savings and credit worthiness in a house that he doesn’t live in. You may not like the fact that people have to qualify for bank loans to buy property, but this is the world we live in.

Obviously if I think landlords are a leech on society, then I must also be in favor of free property for everyone! There's no issue with having to qualify for a loan for a house, but don't piss in my shoes and call it rain. All landlords do is drive up the price of living for someone who could have potentially bought the house they're renting. If they're able to rent it, then they're clearly able to afford the mortgage payments, upkeep, taxes, etc. Plus extra to support the living expenses of the owner.

Oh, your anecdotal evidence about your parent’s home surely beats my Nobel-prize winning economics study citation.

I sure missed any citations in your post. Unless you think just naming a publication counts as citing it.

Because I have anecdotal evidence for someone who bought a house for $400k in 2004 and then later sold it for $280k after the real estate crash.

cool story bro. There's always cases of people losing out because they buy high and sell low, but in your anecdote, what would the $400,000 home be worth today had the homeowner held onto the property? There is no stock portfolio that would appreciate in value the same way houses have.

No, you get different scam calls which you assume are the same but are definitely not, since these ones just go out to names on lists of property owners, not random residents.

Tell me more about the phone calls I receive and how they're not 'real' scam calls.

this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2024
562 points (91.6% liked)

Microblog Memes

10845 readers
679 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

RULES:

  1. Your post must be a screen capture of a microblog-type post that includes the UI of the site it came from, preferably also including the avatar and username of the original poster. Including relevant comments made to the original post is encouraged.
  2. Your post, included comments, or your title/comment should include some kind of commentary or remark on the subject of the screen capture. Your title must include at least one word relevant to your post.
  3. You are encouraged to provide a link back to the source of your screen capture in the body of your post.
  4. Current politics and news are allowed, but discouraged. There MUST be some kind of human commentary/reaction included (either by the original poster or you). Just news articles or headlines will be deleted.
  5. Doctored posts/images and AI are allowed, but discouraged. You MUST indicate this in your post (even if you didn't originally know). If an image is found to be fabricated or edited in any way and it is not properly labeled, it will be deleted.
  6. Absolutely no NSFL content.
  7. Be nice. Don't take anything personally. Take political debates to the appropriate communities. Take personal disagreements & arguments to private messages.
  8. No advertising, brand promotion, or guerrilla marketing.

RELATED COMMUNITIES:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
ReadyUser31@lemmy.world
aeronmelon@lemmy.world
needanke@feddit.org