588
Landlords are scalpers for houses. (thelemmy.club)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/flippanarchy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
73 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -5 points 3 months ago (6 children)

So you think I should split the mortgage 50/50 and be responsible for 100% of maintenance?

Home ownership is so, so much more than a mortgage. In the past five years, I've replaced a sump pump, a water heater, both furnaces, garage door, chimney flue, garbage disposal, several windows, along with remodeling my tenants entire kitchen while mine looks like ass.

If my tenant's HVAC breaks, should I replace it, or tell him that's his responsibility now? Should I tell him he has to mow the lawn and shovel?

My tenant is in his 60s. He wants to live in a nice house with a yard. He doesn't want to be responsible for upkeep, so he pays me to do it instead.

But I guess I'm no better than a private equity firm that buys entire neighborhoods just to raise rent and increase shareholder value.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 15 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (5 children)

    If he only paid half, you'd be charging half a mortgage to be a handyman at best. There's a huge difference because once you've paid out less than half the mortgage and he's paid out more than half, you own a duplex and he owns nothing.

    It's the same assumption all landlords make. The price of sleeping under a roof is equal to the mortgage and the several-hundred-thousand dollar asset at the end is just a little treat for performing the backbreaking labor of having your name on a deed

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [+] -7 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Do you know what a mortgage is? It's a 30 year, essentially rent-to-own contract. Neither of us are planning on living here that long. My tenant isn't planning on living that long. And even if I owned it outright, I'd be paying property tax and insurance.

    Sure, I could come out on top financially. I'm definitely not going to turn a profit but it might be cheaper than renting an apartment in the long run. And in the meantime, I take on all the risk and responsibility until I move and sell the house.

    Not everything is a capitalist grift. I'm just trying to get by.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Wether you plan to live there or not in 30 years is irrelevant to the situation.

    Your tenant pay over half the mortgage. So you get a subsidized housing, keep the appreciated value of the duplex as well and all that for the basic maintenance of the property?

    Golly, what a deal.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I think they're not considering how the portion of rent that only goes toward the mortgage is still profit despite it not being accessible until the home is sold or a loan taken against its equity.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago

    It's absolutely relevant if you know how a mortgage works. Payments are ~75% interest in the first decade. I'm not going to have enough equity at that time to make a profit after all the money I put into the house. I'm looking at a $50k loss if the market stays steady. Still cheaper than renting, though.

    Yes, my tenant subsidizes my living costs. That's the point of a duplex. I set the rent at what I thought was fair, given my expected losses and the work I put in.

    There's no shortage of housing here. If my tenant wanted to, he could buy a house right now. He's waiting until he retires, specifically because he doesn't want the responsibilities of home ownership while he's still working.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent