Just to be clear

Aug 5, 2021 6:54 PM

Dude, not everyone can afford to buy real estate. Landlords are needed.

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 6

5 years ago | Likes 46 Dislikes 3

Self-delusional nonsense.

5 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 4

Bullshit. Y'all aren't even angry about housing. You're angry about /desirable/ housing. No one wants to live in bumblefuck, nowhere.

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Check out NPR's coverage on remote workers and how small towns are attracting folks. Works as long as you don't /need/ to live in the city.

5 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

The supply issues aren't really from landlords, but from restrictions on new housing construction through exclusionary zoning and stuff

5 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

although these policies are generally pushed for by homeowners (including landlords) who want to inflate the values of their properties and

5 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

avoid "undesirable" (I.E. poor, black, etc.) folks having somewhere near them to live.

5 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

5 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 3

Don't forget the other factor to artificial price inflation: Artificial scarcity by blocking densification and sensible transit.

5 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 3

And this is speaking as a developer and landlord - We as society are happily allowing money to be funnelled into banks for BS reasons.

5 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 2

I could be building way more modern comfortable homes than I do now if I were allowed to build more townhouses in 'Single Family Home' zones

5 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

Or full apartment complexes with mixed zoning instead of suburbs

5 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Locals refuse to allow mid-density away from the city core, which jacks land prices up to a point where only deep-pocketed Devs can play,

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

then whine and complain about the towering apartments/condos we have to build to make a return on the core land...

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Baloney. Renting also serves the less-than-permanent population. Not everyone wants to buy a chunk of land and settle on it for 30 yrs.

5 years ago | Likes 27 Dislikes 4

So have public apartments you CAN rent at cost

5 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

When done at sensible levels. But unregulated capitalism never rewards moderation.

5 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 1

Who said anything about unregulated markets? Unregulated capitalism is dog eat dog, and we see that in the US in many markets.

5 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

So if there were no rental properties, housing prices would be so low that anyone could afford to buy instead of rent?

5 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

As a disabled person with little income, no.

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

No rich people would buy property and hoard it to raise prices. The idea that rentals are property hoarding is bullshit. Real estate is

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

a rich man's game and would be even more so if rentals were not available for the lower and middle class

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

You'd need to prevent both landlords and real estate moguls from hoarding property

5 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 2

Who funds multi-tenant property construction then?

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Local governments

5 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

That’s basically the logical conclusion. The problem being that whoever buys a home would natural want it to be spread out, which means no

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

apartments. Most people won’t be able to afford an actual home, which will just result in those people being homeless? OP has a stupid take

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

that wasn’t thought through properly. The working poor class needs landlords because apartments will be the only way they can survive.

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

The 'working class' needs access to housing, which could be provided by 'the working class' itself without a landlord leeching profits...

5 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Nice idea in theory, won’t actually work because the assumption that housing prices are the way they are solely because of landlords is just

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

that's how supply and demand works, yes, although personally i don't think housing should be a commodity at all

5 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 7

I don't how it works in your part of the country, but no one around me rents (or buys and rents out) single family homes. Rentals are all

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Apartments, duplexes, town houses, etc. And are largely to people who don't want to own for a variety of reasons.

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

How would multi-family units be built under this model? They are essential to providing enough capacity.

5 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Without a landlord to benefit from a rental agreement, you'd probably want to sell multi-family housing unit by unit to avoid maintenance.

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

gov't should greatly expand its role in providing housing, and if we need private ownership, individual units in buildings can be sold

5 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

but models already exist for cooperatively owned and managed apartment buildings

5 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

That was tried starting in the 50s and became a disaster. Many cities have since demolished those buidlings.

5 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2