San Francisco has banned RealPage, a software company that computer-generates recommended rents for landlord clients in what some are calling a price-fixing scheme. It’s a step toward curbing rent-raising collusion between landlords.
I have a real problem with landlords. It feels like an especially predatory business. Some things just shouldn’t be for profit. I mean, when you own something that people universally need, and charge as much as you possibly can for it, to maximize your own profit, for nothing other than just being the owner, it feels really scummy.
I think there’s a little room for nuance, but not much. The way corporate landlords are buying up houses and collaborating to fix prices is totally fucked and needs regulated. There also needs to be regulation or limits for private property owners who buy up a bunch of properties and slumlord it.
Where I think there’s nuance is how things fall right now. I just left the military and I’m renting out my house exclusively to military occupants who are not trying to buy. I bought it at 3% interest and my mortgage is more or less fixed. The next buyer was looking for it as an addition to their rental portfolio. I did the math before deciding to rent and found that because my interest and mortgage are so low I can charge $800/month less in rent than a mortgage would be if I sold it. It’s also less than their housing allowance so they have more for utilities and food.
It’s regrettable that this is the situation, but in this specific case in a very high demand/low supply area, renting it out is the lesser of the evils. Hopefully the market crashes or rates fall and I can sell it to a family who needs it. But until then, I’ll try to make things easier on some service members.
It’s admirable that you are trying to help some service men and women, and not merely looking to make the highest possible profit for yourself. I’m sure you’re not the only landlord who isn’t motivated primarily by greed, but many, if not most, are, because they are incentivized to be.
When the goal is maximum profits, it incentivizes business owners of all types to generate as much revenue as possible (and in the case of housing, that means increase rents as much as possible) and cut costs as much as possible. That’s why many people are paying more and more for lower and lower quality housing.
The problem is the profit motive. And we can’t just hope that all landlords will decide to be more like you, not when they have every incentive to be as greedy as possible.
I own my home. I may rent it out when I retire because I sure as fuck won’t have any money. Maybe we’ll get an RV or move to the Philippines. Dunno. But I need to get paid on that home.
For one, renters are likely to fuck shit up, because it’s not theirs, they have no stake in the property. They may simply be ignorant and ignore problems that cost $100 to fix today, $1,000 to fix tomorrow. Also, I need to buy extra liability insurance.
Then there’s routine stuff. When my ex and I bought the place we took payday loans for 2-months just to get the tools and stuff we needed to care for the place. And nearly everything we bought was used. Paid them off responsibly and quickly, but it was costly.
Ever priced a new roof? Hell, within the last 30-days our sink stopped up, the washer died, fridge finally died. and that’s only the big stuff. Even buying off FB, that was $1,000 in new appliances and repairs. Oh, and the hot water heater leaks, but that’s under control for the moment. And the roof needs patched. I’m scared to even price that, can’t afford it ATM anyway.
So yeah, I need serious “profit” just to break even.
EDIT: Do you idiots think I’m currently renting this home? FFS, try reading from the beginning.
So yeah, I need serious “profit” just to break even.
That’s a contradiction in terms. To break even is by definition not a profit. To make a profit, you need a surplus after you minus expenses from revenue. If landlords were content to just break even, I wouldn’t necessarily have a problem with them. In fact, I think not-for-profit housing could go a long way in addressing the housing affordability crisis.
Didn’t word that well, agreed. But you need solid profit up front to backstop for emergencies and risk. I would be a one man, one house operation. I couldn’t spread the risk around like a corporate landlord with 100 or 1,000 properties.
If landlords were content to just break even
After paying on the property, maintaining and improving it, I deserve no profit for my 20-years of labor?
Are you saying that workers should be content to merely break even for their labor? Your labor is worthy, but mine is not?
If you plan on moving out anyways, why not just sell the house? It’d give you a large up front sum of money, and you would never have to worry about maintenance or bad tenants again.
I’m not the picture of fiscal responsibility. Be much more comfortable with a predictable income, especially since I’ll be too old to work.
Selling the house would be a last resort for two reasons. My wife is foreign and would be lost without me. I want to know she will always have a roof to sleep under, no matter what. Two, I really want to be able to leave it to my children, give them a jump in life when we’re both gone.
You can get reliable maintenance estimates and keep the rent near costs plus a small profit easily enough. Charging the market price that’s been illegally pushed up by a cartel is not defensible.
Probably because you talked about needing a ton of profit. When I think you meant revenue to cover costs and then some profit, but not extreme amounts.
I have a real problem with landlords. It feels like an especially predatory business. Some things just shouldn’t be for profit. I mean, when you own something that people universally need, and charge as much as you possibly can for it, to maximize your own profit, for nothing other than just being the owner, it feels really scummy.
I think there’s a little room for nuance, but not much. The way corporate landlords are buying up houses and collaborating to fix prices is totally fucked and needs regulated. There also needs to be regulation or limits for private property owners who buy up a bunch of properties and slumlord it.
Where I think there’s nuance is how things fall right now. I just left the military and I’m renting out my house exclusively to military occupants who are not trying to buy. I bought it at 3% interest and my mortgage is more or less fixed. The next buyer was looking for it as an addition to their rental portfolio. I did the math before deciding to rent and found that because my interest and mortgage are so low I can charge $800/month less in rent than a mortgage would be if I sold it. It’s also less than their housing allowance so they have more for utilities and food.
It’s regrettable that this is the situation, but in this specific case in a very high demand/low supply area, renting it out is the lesser of the evils. Hopefully the market crashes or rates fall and I can sell it to a family who needs it. But until then, I’ll try to make things easier on some service members.
It’s admirable that you are trying to help some service men and women, and not merely looking to make the highest possible profit for yourself. I’m sure you’re not the only landlord who isn’t motivated primarily by greed, but many, if not most, are, because they are incentivized to be.
When the goal is maximum profits, it incentivizes business owners of all types to generate as much revenue as possible (and in the case of housing, that means increase rents as much as possible) and cut costs as much as possible. That’s why many people are paying more and more for lower and lower quality housing.
The problem is the profit motive. And we can’t just hope that all landlords will decide to be more like you, not when they have every incentive to be as greedy as possible.
I own my home. I may rent it out when I retire because I sure as fuck won’t have any money. Maybe we’ll get an RV or move to the Philippines. Dunno. But I need to get paid on that home.
For one, renters are likely to fuck shit up, because it’s not theirs, they have no stake in the property. They may simply be ignorant and ignore problems that cost $100 to fix today, $1,000 to fix tomorrow. Also, I need to buy extra liability insurance.
Then there’s routine stuff. When my ex and I bought the place we took payday loans for 2-months just to get the tools and stuff we needed to care for the place. And nearly everything we bought was used. Paid them off responsibly and quickly, but it was costly.
Ever priced a new roof? Hell, within the last 30-days our sink stopped up, the washer died, fridge finally died. and that’s only the big stuff. Even buying off FB, that was $1,000 in new appliances and repairs. Oh, and the hot water heater leaks, but that’s under control for the moment. And the roof needs patched. I’m scared to even price that, can’t afford it ATM anyway.
So yeah, I need serious “profit” just to break even.
EDIT: Do you idiots think I’m currently renting this home? FFS, try reading from the beginning.
That’s a contradiction in terms. To break even is by definition not a profit. To make a profit, you need a surplus after you minus expenses from revenue. If landlords were content to just break even, I wouldn’t necessarily have a problem with them. In fact, I think not-for-profit housing could go a long way in addressing the housing affordability crisis.
Didn’t word that well, agreed. But you need solid profit up front to backstop for emergencies and risk. I would be a one man, one house operation. I couldn’t spread the risk around like a corporate landlord with 100 or 1,000 properties.
After paying on the property, maintaining and improving it, I deserve no profit for my 20-years of labor?
Are you saying that workers should be content to merely break even for their labor? Your labor is worthy, but mine is not?
Yeah you’re really not beating the allegations here, bud.
I hope that house turns you under.
Who the hell upvotes evil shit like this comment?!
Lemmy: Capitalists don’t deserve the profits of our labor!
Also Lemmy: Fuck you, I want your labor for free!
Fucking children.
If you plan on moving out anyways, why not just sell the house? It’d give you a large up front sum of money, and you would never have to worry about maintenance or bad tenants again.
Fair question! Two reasons:
I’m not the picture of fiscal responsibility. Be much more comfortable with a predictable income, especially since I’ll be too old to work.
Selling the house would be a last resort for two reasons. My wife is foreign and would be lost without me. I want to know she will always have a roof to sleep under, no matter what. Two, I really want to be able to leave it to my children, give them a jump in life when we’re both gone.
You can get reliable maintenance estimates and keep the rent near costs plus a small profit easily enough. Charging the market price that’s been illegally pushed up by a cartel is not defensible.
Who the hell said anything about any of that?! Jesus, a guy talks about renting his house when he retires and suddenly he’s a corporate slumlord.
Probably because you talked about needing a ton of profit. When I think you meant revenue to cover costs and then some profit, but not extreme amounts.
deleted by creator