this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2024
284 points (86.2% liked)

No Stupid Questions

36324 readers
921 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Reason I'm asking is because I have an aunt that owns like maybe 3 - 5 (not sure the exact amount) small townhouses around the city (well, when I say "city" think of like the areas around a city where theres no tall buildings, but only small 2-3 stories single family homes in the neighborhood) and have these houses up for rent, and honestly, my aunt and her husband doesn't seem like a terrible people. They still work a normal job, and have to pay taxes like everyone else have to. They still have their own debts to pay. I'm not sure exactly how, but my parents say they did a combination of saving up money and taking loans from banks to be able to buy these properties, fix them, then put them up for rent. They don't overcharge, and usually charge slightly below the market to retain tenants, and fix things (or hire people to fix things) when their tenants request them.

I mean, they are just trying to survive in this capitalistic world. They wanna save up for retirement, and fund their kids to college, and leave something for their kids, so they have less of stress in life. I don't see them as bad people. I mean, its not like they own multiple apartment buildings, or doing excessive wealth hoarding.

Do leftists mean people like my aunt too? Or are they an exception to the "landlords are bad" sentinment?

(page 8) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

both are parasites.

[–] [email protected] 68 points 1 month ago (11 children)

Every house that is owned for an investment contributes to the high price of housing. People shouldn’t own homes if they’re not going to make them a home. It’s unethical in my view to hoard real estate.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If you make a profit for allowing another person shelter (particularly if you don't need that space for yourself and/or your own family), then you are a parasite.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (4 children)

A bit of a hyperbole, but for the sake of this discussion, let's say there is a house and no one can afford it but me. If I don't buy it and rent it, no one can live in it. What would be the right thing to do?

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 month ago

The market determines the price. If no one can afford it the price is too high.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

I take umbrage with the hypothetical itself. Do you believe that buying the property and renting it out is the only possible solution here?

The "right thing" would be to not have a situation like that in the first place where only one person (or one small group of people) can afford to own the roof over their head.

But, obviously, an option you're neglecting here, is letting people live in the property without paying rent. Nobody is forcing you to make a profit off people's basic needs for survival.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 month ago

Reduce the price of the house

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Go invest in nice cars, miniatures, god damn funko pops or stamps.

Not in roofs that belong over peoples heads. People need them, you don’t. It’s that fucking simple.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

They got no cap rate... How are they supposed to rent seek.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)

No.

I of course can't speak for anyone except myself, but for me, what your aunt is doing is what essentially capitalism is all about.

Its when those landlords get replaced by venture capital corporations and reits that it becomes a problem.

In your aunts case, the rent money stays local, contributes back to the local economy, etc...

In the case of venture capital and corporate ownership, the only goal is to increase a stock price for a corporation. None of that money gets returned to the local economy except for possibly hiring a local property management firm to handle things on the ground for them.

When capitalism remains about people, all of good. When corporations take the reins of ownership so their profit becomes the sole motive is when things go bad.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 month ago (1 children)

what your aunt is doing is what essentially capitalism is all about.

Both things can be true. Capitalism is inherently parasitic.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Capitalism is inherently parasitic

I fundamentally disagree with that.

Venture Capitalism is parasitic. But Capitalism itself is not at all. At it's heart, if we continue with the landlord analogy, let's say that you are renting a house from the OP's Aunt. She's paying the building insurance. She's paying the maintenance, (or in some good old fashioned cases doing it themselves). She's dealing with the paperwork involved in owning a home. Hell, in some cases you don't even have to mow your own lawn. So of course she's charging you rent. It's not a charity.

But if she's a private owner, than your rent stays with her. She uses what she needs to maintain the building and...yes...makes a profit that then gets spent in the local economy.

The only time there's an issue is when your rent is being sent to a corporation that may not even be in the same country as you, and that money leaves your local economy for good.

To use an anecdotal example, I've worked in my time for two different furniture stores in my town. One was a chain, and one was/is a family run operation from the beginning. And yes...that family is wildly successful; I'm not guessing millionaires, but close to it. And I don't begrudge them at all for that. Because it's family owned, they aren't forced to only care about a stock price or about profit. My boss would randomly come up to me, sometimes multiple times a year, clap me on the back and say "You're doing a good job, I'm going to add a buck an hour to your wage."

Because they can. Because for all intents and purposes, you've got a better chance to be treated like a human being when a corporation isn't in the way.

The chain furniture store would only give out raises when forced to by government mandated cost of living increases, because anything more would cause the stock price to go down.

The heart of capitalism is my first example. The reality of capitalism is my second unfortunately. But that's not the fault of capitalism itself, it's the lack of government oversight protecting us from predatory corporations.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

But that’s not the fault of capitalism itself, it’s the lack of government oversight protecting us from predatory corporations.

I remember when I used to be naive enough to believe this.

The predatory corporations succeeding is capitalism succeeding.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Lol try to be a little more condescending, will you?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Yeah sorry, I guess I'm just tired of this shit.

And I really meant that genuinely, I do remember being that naive... I remember making the exact arguments that person is making. Since then, another decade or so of life experience has informed my positions.

This is the big lie that they tell you in order to put up with the constant exploitation of living in a capitalist society.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 64 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Owning property isn’t a job

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Depends on the person. There are people that mean every landlord. Their reasoning isn't as bad as you might think either. The main issues are that they still exert control over property, a form of private governance; they're denying the same financial stability through housing equity to another family; and they can artificially raise the price of housing.

That happens at every level of being a landlord. Of course the systemic problems only get worse as the number of owned or managed units goes up.

Most people are thinking about the giant corporations holding thousands of units.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›