this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2024
213 points (100.0% liked)

196

16501 readers
2471 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

Renting isnt the problem. If tou own two houses and an apartment and rent out them except the one youre living in that isnt really the problem. When a single person owns a whole city thats the problem. Most people rent out houses/apartments as a small passive income. If its your only form of income that means youre not really contributing to society. Youre getting money for an asset that already exists.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago (1 children)

How about buying a cheap house that needs a lot of work and renting out rooms to your friends so that all of you can have an affordable place to live?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I think that's just called informally splitting a mortgage, homie

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

If the mortgage is in your name and you charge them rent, you don't co-own the house, you're a landlord that's gaslighting your "friends" and probably getting free maintenance and labor to boot.

Everyone would be on the mortgage if the goal wasn't to exploit them to build your own equity.

Do you exploit them less than others would? Possibly. Or maybe not depending on circumstance. Congratulations on being the last in the line.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

There are situations where it does make sense to rent or put a property up for rent. For example, if you are relocating temporary for a job or education, it would make a lot of sense to get a short term lease, rather than buy or stay in a hotel (depending on price, of course). An individual who know that a property of theirs won't be used for some time can then lease it out to this person. It's a win-win, as tenants don't deal with the process of closing or the responsibility of ownership, and the landlord makes some extra cash on the underutilized property.

However, the problem really comes down to when it becomes a business. Companies buy up large quantities of land and property and rent them out, allowing them to shift the costs of mortgage and taxes to the tenant while reaping the benefits of increasing equity. Furthermore, the amount of property for sale decreases, artificially lowering supply for housing to own. This drives up costs. As the company buys up more and more property, they also get to jack up the prices because of their local monopoly. In the individual landlords case, this wouldn't happen because they have to compete with the rest of the diverse market. So overall, prices go up for housing everywhere.

I see a few paths to a solution.

  1. Limit the number of properties a corporation/individual can lease and/or increase taxes exponentially. This prevents the ability to lease out tons of property, while still allowing businesses to own multiple properties as needed for actual work.
  2. Remove restrictions on single family only housing and residential zoning. This is mainly a US issue, but it would allow for denser housing options, increasing supply in places where that is currently impossible. It would also create more opportunities for economic growth, as placing residencies in areas with businesses reduces demand on cars and makes it easier to network with people.
load more comments
view more: next ›