• Holyginz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    10 months ago

    They aren’t growing shit. They are leeching off of people who actually work qnd majority of them do as little to improve these as they possibly can.

    • Draupnir@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Explain to me who then takes responsibility to repair derelict properties into livable condition? The city? Local government? Would you take this on? What would you expect as compensation to take this on?

      • Holyginz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        10 months ago

        Well the landlords certainly don’t. I don’t give a shit about people taking advantage of others to generate a passive income for themselves without giving anything back in return while rents increase and just pocket in and continue screwing others over. Also companies buying up everything to artificially increase house costs can burn to the ground with the CEOs and executives inside.

        • Draupnir@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Well, it sounds like you and I both agree that large companies like Black Rock, Zillow, and whoever else is involved in the alleged price fixing with that rent recommendation software thing are screwing society and yes, can burn to the ground.

          I don’t know enough to comment on rents going up outside of them, but generally, things like this come down to both inflationary pressures and a consequence of free markets. Some states have enacted regulations capping the amount that rents can increase, others have not. I may be wrong, but it seems that your perspective on the situation is simplifying the issue to mean that landlords are squandering resources (homes/units) and extorting people without providing anything. There is still a positive result to society in providing places for people to live. A profit is needed in these cases, though, as it maintains incentive for maintaining homes and investing in the creation and rehabilitation of additional living spaces.

          The primary issue right now from my best knowledge is that there simply isn’t enough supply of homes and living spaces available, leading to increased demand, and willingness to pay a higher price. If you ever take an economics class, you will learn the simple truth that the value of something is only up to what people are willing to pay. If demand is lowered, people, as a whole are less likely to pay for the price being asked, and the seller will need to continue lowering, and lowering their price to find what the buyer will willingly pay. This is part of the reason that we have the consequence of high interest rates at the moment as well.

        • Draupnir@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          So if the A/C dies in the summer making the home unlivable, you say you would be on the hook to repair it? It’s on the landlord or property owner.

          If you go back to my comment I am bringing in the idea of a derelict property. There is no tenant in a derelict property, aside from possibly a squatter.

          And how about if nobody can even live there in the first place because it’s so bad? Then who pays?

          • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            Where does the landlord get the money? Do landlords often rent property at a loss? Is being a landlord a charity, where someone takes their own money and uses it to subsidize a stranger’s housing costs?

            Of course not. Landlords set the rent such that rent - costs > 0. The money to repair a rental home ultimately comes from the renter. The landlord may pay up-front, as in your example with a derelict property, but that’s with the intention of making back what they pay and more in the form of rent. Like all businesses, the cost of doing business plus all the profit the market will bear gets passed on to the consumer.

            • Draupnir@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              Yes, you are certainly right about that. The landlord or rehab investor making a profit was never part of my argument. Operating rentals or investing in real estate is a business like any other, and thus needs to turn a profit in order to continue operations. In order to address the point you are making, I see what you’re saying about the flow through and how that gets used to repair properties. However, you may agree that we would both look at a $10,000 capital expenditure on a new AC unit differently if we were renting a home, which is generally for shorter terms (perhaps 2 years in Austin, TX on work assignment) than resident ownership for life.

              If you are not someone who needs a rental home, or a rental apartment, then don’t use one. These types of businesses exist, however because they serve a need in society, hence their ubiquity. I invite you to consider the possibility that there is a valid reason for rental homes in many situations and areas that are beneficial for the right people. Yes, there are scummy landlords and yes, the landlord intends to make a profit, but this is not always at the sole detriment society.

              • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                10 months ago

                you’ve abandoned your original point, now you’re just saying “not all landlords are shitty” when you started by saying “the money to fix rental homes comes from landlords”. it doesn’t matter how we look at buying a new AC unit for a rental vs an owner-occupied property, the money spent on that AC unit will come from the people who live in the property. The occupant always pays for everything.

                • Draupnir@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  10 months ago

                  OK so you wanna go back to it then. Let’s say your three months in on a new rental home. Landlord may be averages $100-$200 per month profit, so reasonably they’ve only collected $600 in total profit from you. AC now breaks and needs a $10,000 replacement. Who pays? Have they collected enough money from you so that you are paying for it?

                  At that point, you might as well start arguing that every business ever pays for things because of money, they’ve collected in their patrons. Same reason how you, assuming you’re a W-2 worker, get paid by your business. They collect a profit from the service or product they provide.

                  • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    Let’s say your three months in on a new rental home. Landlord may be averages $100-$200 per month profit, so reasonably they’ve only collected $600 in total profit from you. AC now breaks and needs a $10,000 replacement. Who pays? Have they collected enough money from you so that you are paying for it?

                    This only seems to not make sense if you assume that the landlord hasn’t rented the property in the past and won’t continue to rent it in the future, and also that you assume that revenue is the same as profit, which it fundamentally is not. If they’re only making $100-$200 in profit how do you account for the rest of the money that’s paid in rent? There’s no way they’re renting me a house with central air for only $100-$200/mo, is the rest of the money I pay in rent maybe, and hear me out here, going to cover expenses like a new AC unit?

                    you might as well start arguing that every business ever pays for things because of money, they’ve collected in their patrons.

                    I’m arguing exactly that, that every business pays for things with or in anticipation of revenue. It’s built into the idea of seeking profit. I’m a W2 employee and the business that employs me pays me with revenue they bring in and in anticipation of being able to use my work to bring in more revenue than they pay me. It’s kinda fundamental to the rationally self-interested profit motive that’s supposed to drive this whole economic system.

      • ieatpillowtags@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        The people who own them? What do landlords have to do with derelict properties anyway? Once repaired they could be sold or rented, but landlords are not the ones fixing up old houses…

        • Draupnir@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          So then who coordinates the work to get old houses fixed up? Who organizes and provides the funding, sources contractors, makes design decisions about how to best rehabilitate a home for modern use, and holds the whole project accountable for its completion?

          Across the nation and most of the rest of the world both resident owners and landlord owners will fix up properties. Unlivable properties however are primarily taken on by investors and rehab-to-rent landlords. Yes, they are making a profit out of it (most of the time), but society then receives an additional livable unit in good condition, or possibly more if it is a multifamily complex.