this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2023
710 points (88.1% liked)

Personal Finance

3710 readers
1 users here now

Learn about budgeting, saving, getting out of debt, credit, investing, and retirement planning. Join our community, read the PF Wiki, and get on top of your finances!

Note: This community is not region centric, so if you are posting anything specific to a certain region, kindly specify that in the title (something like [USA], [EU], [AUS] etc.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.crimedad.work/post/12162

Why? Because apparently they need some more incentive to keep units occupied. Also, even though a property might be vacant, there's still imputed rental income there. Its owner is just receiving it in the form of enjoying the unit for himself instead of receiving an actual rent check from a tenant. That imputed rent ought to be taxed like any other income.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (21 children)

Landlords pay up front (directly or via a loan, which the renters presumably cannot get) and assume the risk of vacancies and repairs. If landlords ceased to exist, how do you propose new housing stock be created? Should the government be your landlord?

[–] [email protected] 60 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (13 children)

Landlords pay up front (directly or via a loan, which the renters presumably cannot get) and assume the risk of vacancies and repairs.

And then they get bailed out by the government when their risk blows up.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/landlords-were-never-meant-to-get-bailout-funds-many-got-it-anyway-11590494400

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/blog/four-reasons-landlords-should-take-advantage-federal-rental-assistance/

And they have little to no risk in the first place because the market has such high demand that they can pretty much instantly fill vacancies, and they barely do repairs if at all. And at least where I live, renters are required to have/pay for renters insurance which further drives down the landlord's risk. And on top of all that, they have security deposits to lower their risk even further. They don't take on any meaningful risk.

If landlords ceased to exist, how do you propose new housing stock be created? Should the government be your landlord?

Government investment into housing development (which then turn into market rate housing/co-ops), zoning fixes, and a LVT is the solution. The builders get paid, home ownership becomes affordable, the risks are dealt with, and renters aren't being priced gouged. It would also do wonders to help fix the homelessness crisis.

And none of it needs the government to own your home.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (12 children)

Investment into housing development, zoning fixes, market rate housing, co-ops, and a LVT is the solution.

You can’t be serious? Let’s review.

Investment into housing development

By who..? Come on, be honest, who do you think is going to do this 🤣

zoning fixes

That allow who to build more housing?

market rate housing

Is literally what the West has right now.

Co-Ops

We have these now.

and a LVT

This is a fine step. Most states have property taxes now that include the land that a rental sits on.

If you can’t pay for your own housing, your choices are either for the government to pay for it, or for the private sector to pay for it. In either event the entity that owns your house, that isn’t you, is your landlord. If you can’t pay for your own housing, and you don’t want the private sector or the government to provide it for you, then you’re homeless.

[–] WhiteTiger 4 points 1 year ago

Don't waste your breath, if anything Lemmy is somehow less financially literate than reddit.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)