Happy Labour Day to people who are not landlords.

May day!

I see what you did there.

The average American has a seventh grade reading level (with 54% of the population with less than a sixth grade reading level), and you expect them to be educated enough to 1. know what it is and 2. look for a Wikipedia article on it?

Jesus, half this fucking country doesn't even live in reality anymore. Somehow, they're supposed to just know that it's on Wikipedia.

I had a great public education and this one of the very few things that wasn't mentioned.

be me american sees OP comment googles haymarket affair first result is Wikipedia article for haymarket affair 😐

At the McCormick reaper plant, a long-simmering strike erupted in violence on May 3, and police fired at strikers, killing at least two. Anarchists called a protest meeting at the West Randolph Street Haymarket, advertising it in inflammatory leaflets, one of which called for “Revenge!”

The crowd gathered on the evening of May 4 on Des Plaines Street, just north of Randolph, was peaceful, and Mayor Carter H. Harrison, who attended, instructed police not to disturb the meeting. But when one speaker urged the dwindling crowd to “throttle” the law, 176 officers under Inspector John Bonfield marched to the meeting and ordered it to disperse.

Then someone hurled a bomb at the police, killing one officer instantly. Police drew guns, firing wildly. Sixty officers were injured, and eight died; an undetermined number of the crowd were killed or wounded.

But sure, the cops who were told not to show up, and then showed up when they were angry that people were pissed that they murdered workers, they deservedly got a bomb in their faces. Cops are always a bunch of authoritarian pieces of shit who can't stand being criticized for being the violent fucking thugs they are.

So while I generally agree with your sentiment, there are some obvious ways that sometime could be an ethical landlord.

What if you have a house that's too big, so you convert a floor into an apartment? You're adding to the number of housing units available. Should you be forced to sell a portion of your house/building to whoever wants to live there? Or should you be able to rent it out to someone at a reasonable rate? Do we want rules that discourage people from potentially adding units to the market?

I feel like the "all landlords are evil" narrative is way too simplistic, and that simplistic view turns off people who would otherwise support reasonable limits on landlords and housing ownership. Like, it's obvious that we need limits and taxes on people who own multiple properties, and it's obvious that there are companies that exploit renters and drive up prices, but it's all more complicated than just "landlords evil lol".

Your assuming everyone wants to own property over renting.

House and property ownership has a lot of responsibility and expenses involved. Your water heater breaks well there is $1000+ your roof needs replacing there is 30K. All of that goes away when you rent as it isn't your responsibility.

If you own property it can be harder and more risky to relocate. I know a few people that bought in 2007 and then were stuck as they couldn't afford to move because they were upsidedown on their house.

Not saying renting is all sunshine and roses. I personally would rather own then rent but home ownership isn't for everyone.

But I do think it is a major problem when you have a few companies buying up all property so no one else can afford it. But I don't think being a Landlord is inherently evil.

Like in a housing shortage you’re hoarding property and profiting off it.

Housing shortages are caused by bad government policy: namely, low-density zoning. Direct your anger towards the entity that deserves it, and make them fix their fuck-up.

(Note: I'm not making some kind of Libertarian "all government is bad" argument here. I'm saying that in this specific case, the laws need to be changed.)

Not everyone is able or willing to own their property, what would they do if landlords didn't exist?

I think everyone in your replies is conflating being a full time landlord and a part time landlord. One of them is definitely more evil than the other.

What's the alternative here? Only letting big companies without any ethical regards rent housing?

Sure, there's a good argument to be made that housing is essential to survive and as such should be provided by the government, but that's not the world we live in. In this society, it's likely someone is going to have to rent it out and I'd rather it be a person who actually gives a shit and can be held responsible rather than some faceless corporation.

The vast majority of landlords are normal people renting out a portion of the home they live in as well.

What you are asking is that they should close those doors or have the rental be free? Either of those situations is bunk.

No, certain corporate landlords, like Blackrock, is even. Most small-scale landlords are not inherently evil because they rent out their properties. Having a few is not "hoarding."

Well, renting out property is the only way for most people to achieve some moderate wealth.

Best case scenario, rent is low and only covers taxes and building upkeep. Then you're essentially getting a zero interest loan since property is valuable and it's being loaned for free.

Like you’ll ever buy a house yourself and support all of the taxes and upkeep with your nonexistent pay

Where would people live then? Those don't want to buy. Under the bridge?

No it's absolutely not. Your comment displays a complete ignorance of the business.

My last landlord didn't raise my rent for seven years. I was thankful until I moved out and he still hasn't been able to re-rent the place after two years despite dropping the rent by $100. He just didn't want to risk losing his prize schmuck lol.

What I most hate is landlords who put an automatic 5% (or whatever) increase into an auto-renewing lease. It's bullshit because their mortgage generally isn't increasing like that.

I work at a credit union where we deal with a lot of smaller investors and many of them have properties where they aren't breaking even on a cash flow basis. But they are using the losses to lower their taxable income while building equity elsewhere. They are (from tenants I've heard from) good landlords. Lately we've been dealing with a lot of realtors that are buying up properties and that just doesn't sit well with me so I'm looking to change careers and get more into C&I and CRE rather than SFR investments. Being able to cash out 7.25 weeks of accrued vacation time I haven't been able to take too is a big plus.

In a lot of places if you own any land you are a millionaire, it's coming to the point that if you own a condo you are a millionaire.

Being a landlord, making money off of the hard work of other people, and still having enough time to have a full time job "on the side" means you don't need to be a landlord because it obviously isn't an important job that you have to dedicate time and attention to.

Choosing to use a basic human right as a form of income is scummy. All landlords are scum, whether they are rich or not.

Considering I have a very good credit score and a full time job but the banks wouldn't lend me that much regardless if I could find a shack for that little, yea, sounds like privilege to a lot of us out here.

Why is it difficult to keep things running? Keeping the plumbing, electrical, and building amenities in order is part of your legal responsibility. Don't like it? Get a real job. People HAVE to have a home. You don't HAVE to make money off it.

I'm in that boat. I'm a land lord. I built my forever home but after a medical issue I lost my job. Unfortunately my career choice, while lucrative, only has one or two positions per state. So I had to move. I'd like to return to the home I built but that won't be for another 10 years minimum when I retire. I don't want to sell my home, so I rented it out. I'm currently renting an apartment myself.

If you have the funds to buy an entire second property, you aren't just a "mom and pop", youre in the 1%.

This just in - every blue collar business owner with a shop is in the 1%

Why do anything and sell for a profit then? And owning rental properties is work. A lot of work. And you're wrong about the 1% thing

Why would someone become a landlord? My uncle took out loans to buy distressed properties sold at auctions, and then he would put in the "sweat equity" to fix them up for renting out, all while working his full time job. So, he would work all day, and afterwards would manage those buildings doing all the maintenance and cleaning himself.

Why did he do it? He did it to make money...so he could send his son to college, so hopefully his son wouldn't have to hustle a full time job and a busy part time job as well. My uncle worked his ass off to make a better life for his son, how selfish of him.

Everyone is always profiting off the hard work of others, that's the whole point of civilization. Yes, many landlords are exploitative. But not all, and probably not even most, are.

You either put your money in a savings account at low interest rates or invest in something else.

Why would someone become a landlord in the first place?

As a way out of a job they hate and as an investment opportunity. Maybe they'd rather paint walls and replace toilets than sit in an office.

"Mom and Pop landlords" aren't a thing

Where'd you get this, straight from your ass? Yes they are, I know several.

You're so confidently incorrect here I'm not sure why I'm bothering as I'm sure you'll be a prick about it but virtually nothing you wrote is true of the landlords I know. And before you accuse me of simping for corporations. Nope. I've lived several years in corporate owned properties and despise the level of exploitation they standardized on. They're fucking evil bastards.

The fact that you don't know and can't fathom a landlord that owns a small amount of property and treats their tenants decently lets me know that you have a very limited life experience. I am moving soon to a corporate owned place for a variety of reasons but I wish I didn't have to. My current landlord owns just this one property to my knowledge and he's treated me well since day one. There's a huge difference.

Maybe if you pulled your head from your ass you'd understand that your lack of experience has no bearing on how reality is.

my owning a few houses is totally the reason your city that I don't live in won't build new housing to meet demand

You're literally buying the supply and creating a demand by owning more than you can personally use.

That's what I have to do on my weekends too, and I don't own shit.

covid hoarders also worked hard to buy up all the hand sanitizer and toilet paper

also, pick a monster dictator who committed genocide, they worked hard too

working hard doesn't mean you're doing good things, you can work hard and be evil

landlords are creating a scarcity of places for people to home and feed their families in order to charge those families money to get rich off, and, regardless of how "nice" they pretend to be in fixing the sink if it clogs, will throw a baby into the street to be homeless if their demands for money aren't met.

Nice myth.

I'm sorry for your negative experiences, but please be mindful that not only your subjective world exists. I might have been extremely lucky, but all my previous rental places were maintained by nice folks.

Yeah I agree. Painting with a broad brush is something we all do, but my god people have some self awareness once in a while.

What the fuck is this. I could make all sorts of stupid assumptions about you too, you're honestly not worth it

Yo you've done a really good job at staying away from hexbear posts on your alt account. I've only seen one, impressive!

What's the point of replacing one sham system with another?

You do understand that not all landlords are the same? Even if 50% are assholes you're still lapping the other half in there whilst they're not doing much wrong

What’s their rent?

5k on the hamster wheel every day

Yeah, first my dog and I just kinda coexisted, but then we were forced to talk to each other because turns out that he's my coworker.

Your mother's tenants paid for your undergrad, and their kids probably took out student loans.

It's not how they treat you but I'm glad you have a good one, it's how they're ruining the real estate market for people to purchase new homes. They buy all of the single family and rental properties for airBNBs or tear them down to build luxury only condos. Also, they're not really luxury condos. Hopefully your city has anti slumlord laws as well.

mine just jacked the rent again, more than doubled now in three years. it had gone up a grand total of one time over the previous 20 years (a whole $20) before he bought the building (pretty cheap, too).

i knew this shit was gonna happen, soon as i saw that notice of the building being sold three years ago to an llc with "investments" in the name. the previous owners were also tenants themselves.

yeah I've had some pretty nightmare landlords that I knew personally or even lived with in some instances.

With an absence of landlords, buying an apartment unit like a condo would be how that works.

If rent was just paying for the costs of utilities, insurance, taxes, general upkeep costs, and the mortgage for my unit I'd have no problem with it. When corporations start sucking up money to line the pockets of investors it becomes a problem.

would you like to get back all the money you spent on a rental property when you move out?

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

Shame they're in no position to buy, I wonder if they would be if people or corporations weren't allowed to own a "few" rentals. Or if reducing the pressure on the market brought by people or corporations who own a "few" rentals would at least make it easier for them to rent in the first place since other people who have to rent would be buying instead.

By "at cost" do you mean they're paying your mortgages and property taxes for you? If so, they could afford to buy if they had a down-payment. They probably don't have a down-payment because all their money goes to rent :)

I don't blame people for being capitalist when living in a capitalist system, but it still sucks. You could try something like a non-predatory form of rent-to-own where they gain equity over time (though these arrangements are usually predatory).

I guess they’d just be homeless without landlords

See. This is why I don't like landlords.

It's either I'm stuck with some transactional fake as fuck relationship or I'm homeless.

It's super fucked up how people basically are constantly essentially getting taxed more and more for the right to survive. No one should be profiting off basic needs

That being said, the system is fucked up, and if you're mainly using their rents to pay for equity, you're playing by the rules while doing more good than harm. It can still be a win-win, and I think it's ok to feel good about that

Homes shouldn't be an investment vehicle, but they are - you should seek to help fix the broken rules, but it's foolish to just ignore them. Most investments have a similar effect somewhere down the line anyways

But the real question is - are you actually a landlord? Technically yes, but in spirit? If you're not making much of a profit from rent, you're not what people mean when they say landlord. The upper middle class has been dabbling in rental properties for a while, but that's not who the term refers to - it's people who own enough that the rental income is the line item they're keeping track of.

The starting line is like 20-30 units, and it's mostly held by investment groups or families that inherited a town... They're who own most rental properties out there

If you rent out a few places and don't put much thought into adjusting the rent, you're not the problem here. You're not the one we're talking about when we talk about landlords

Oh, that is very generous of you! I've edited my comment

Very thoughtful and agreeable comment. Fuck any greedy landlords and corps for buying up properties and driving up housing costs, but landlords and rentals do need to exist for people who need temporary housing or aren’t in the position to buy.

Thank you for your service.

It's easy to demonize and dunk on people for being greedy and just removing houses from the market, but as you well have stated, some people are not in a position to buy. So rent becomes the only true and logical solution.

Sure, they could well be down on their luck. But I would also present the case of the immigrant, new to a country (and having moved with a job offer), having no opportunity to sign for a mortgage (no credit history, didn't gather enough work time in the country to provide payslips). And even if they had a suitcase of money just lying around, it takes a bit of time to decide if you want to settle. The best one can hope for is finding a landlord who's not an asshat.

And no, other solutions proposed in the comments probably would not help, since, for instance, communal rentals tend to have long waiting lists or require some sort of reputation (like knowing some of the community) before allowing you to move in.

I wonder why people are in no position to buy, when homes are treated as a source of revenue for corporations and some people. I wonder why people have to jump through hoops to be able to have a roof, if the property are bought as an investment.
Yeah, maybe you aren't lying and not making a profit out people's suffering, but even you should see that it's not the norm, otherwise your benevolence wouldn't be needed at all. The whole system is cruel, and everyone who participates contributes to it, some more than others.

Since you can't manage our finances*

Pretty sure it was TLC that didn't want no Scrubs. I thought it was a pretty fun show too 🤷

No, it's American Labor Day.

Lolol

Why do Americans have to do everything differently

A government could do any utility providing activity.

So the government would be the landlord

Yeah, it's not much utility, but they can charge huge amounts for it because of how much demand there is for little supply. And the supply is kept low by horrible zoning and stigma against poor people and high density housing.

As climate change spins out of control, all land that is still functionally livable will skyrocket in value.

Which is also why, shocker, the mega rich are buying up massive amounts of land in areas least likely to experience the worst of climate change, like Michigan's Upper Peninsula, which has seen lots of influx of the rich buying property for "future-proofing" their life-plans.

I provide them at barely above market rate, and I do all the work of having people come fix things when they are broken for example.