102

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/18963881

Get rid of landlords...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] pixxelkick@lemmy.world 45 points 1 month ago

Fundamentally the service you are paying for is risk alleviation.

Buying a whole ass property and putting a 20 year mortgage on it is a pretty big risk, home prices fluctuate wildly, shit can go sideways, things can break, anyone who's ever had to suddenly face a situation where "You now have to cough up 10s of thousands of dollars asap or your home becomes condemned" understands this. It happens.

Renting means the landlord assumes this risk for you, they now have to be the one who goes bankrupt if the boiler, washing machine, dishwasher, toilet, sink, whatever suddenly shits the bed and now you have a small pond in your living room or whatever.

Renters get to have a home to live in, with many renters rights, but they at any time can just walk away from the deal and go find somewhere else to live.

If you buy a home, do you think you can suddenly go "ah nevermind Im not feeling it anymore" to the bank and walk away from your mortgage? No, it's an assumed risk you are now chained to for 20 years.

You either have to find some other person willing to buy that risk off of you (sell your house), which is a HUGE amount of effort and requires lawyers and realtors and etc, or live with it.

Renters get to swerve all that and THAT is primarily what you are paying for.

Once you own a home you begin to understand how enormous some random bullshit bad dice roll can quite suddenly empty your entire bank account.

A pipe explodes? a bird decides to fly through your window? Your shower suddenly cracks? Your washing machine shits the bed?

You are the only person around who is liable for all that now when you literally own it, which means you and only you are responsible for fixing it. Hope you had the money set aside.

If you are renting? You call the landlord and they fix it and you dont have to pay a single penny

Every single day you spend living in the home is wear and tear on the facilities. You use the machines, you open and close doors and drawers, that adds up to non zero costs.

Do you think Air conditioners never break down from use? Fridge blowers dont suddenly shit the bed? Furnaces dont require yearly maint?

That shit is expensive and if no one lived in the building, all of it could be shut off.

This is all stuff you are leveraging onto the landlord when you rent, so yes, obviously that is worth a monetary value.

[-] gusgalarnyk@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Insurance exists for a reason, loans exist for a reason, and the difficulty in selling a home is artificial because it's treated like an investment that appreciates instead of a commodity that depreciates like it actually is.

Landlords buy bad appliances all the time, they are incentivized to, the cheaper the better because they don't have to live with the consequences except for repairing it when it breaks.

In exchange for not owning anything in the place you live and having a fundamentally worse experience for it you get to pay someone else their mortgage AND their repair fund. You don't take that into account. Renters pay for everything, we just pay it every month instead of in lump sum hits like an appliance dying.

Landlords do not provide a service, at best they provide living mobility which could be improved drastically if housing wasn't treated like a private investment but instead a public service - so what little service they do provide is artificial.

[-] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world -3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The home is not the investment, the land is. Land is scarce, especially in desirable places. The home itself does depreciate and frequently drags down the price of the property, with new owners often tearing the place to the ground after purchase.

Renters do not pay for everything. Ask any financial advisor and they will tell you it is cheaper to rent than to own. It’s a very common strategy to rent, then take the extra money you save and invest it into stocks and bonds for retirement. In the long run, if your investments match the S&P 500 (not hard to do with index funds) then you’ll have more money than you would have if you bought a home (at national average real estate growth rates anyway).

You might point to some place like San Francisco and claim the people who bought houses there back in the 1990s beat the market. Sure, but that’s the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy. You could just as easily have bought a house in Detroit instead. I would also say you could play the same game about picking stocks after the fact, but that would be beating a dead horse.

So why do people buy houses if they’re a bad investment compared to stocks? Emotional value, mainly. Having a place to call your own is important to a lot of people.

[-] pixxelkick@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

So why do people buy houses if they’re a bad investment compared to stocks? Emotional value, mainly. Having a place to call your own is important to a lot of people.

Also, of course, the same reason one buys anything.

If you own it, you can do whatever you want with it (mostly). Wanna repaint an entire room? No problem. Wanna tear down a (non load bearing) wall and move it? Easy. Wanna tear up the lawn and add raised garden beds? Call before you dig but aside from that, go for it.

Most of that sorta stuff of course isn't kosher if you are renting :p

If you buy a house as an investment you need to work extremely hard to actually net positive. Simply buying a house and sitting on it is usually net negative (reminder that the price tag you buy the house at isnt how much money you pay, you have to account for all the extra interest you pay over 20 years, which is usually a solid +35% or more of the cost of the house)

So your house has to appreciate not only more than the interest you paid, but then even more to also beat basic blue chip stock rates.

Which is, at best, a gamble.

The main way you actually profit is if you renovate the house to boost its value. And that takes a fuck tonne of work. If you hire other people to do it, it wont be profitable, you have to do it yourself to have a hope in hell of netting positive.

So hope you are good at mudding and taping walls, cause you are gonna be doing a lot of it~

[-] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -3 points 1 month ago

All that stuff is dirt cheap if you're not obsessed with buying new and not completely useless.

[-] pixxelkick@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Ah yes, used rafters, used walls, and used drywall... definitely something Ill go to the store and just pickup...

Sometimes you can get lucky at re-use stores and they'll have leftover sheets of drywall from large projects, but those usually get scooped up really fast and you usually dont have the curtesy of time to wait around for when that happens when you actively have a giant hole in your floor or wall that needs to be fixed...

[-] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago

You could not intentionally miss the point or be so goddamned broke you think sheetrock is pricy

[-] zazo@lemmy.world -4 points 1 month ago

So you're advocating that because tenants pay the landlord to assume the risk - they shouldn't have to worry about anything related to the property?

So for example if the door buzzer doesn't work and the landlord knows this and hasn't fixed it because it doesn't affect them - it's okay to just keep the main door always open and let anyone squat and shit anywhere in the communal areas of the building because the tenants don't have to assume the risk of the properties losing value because any potential buyer dislikes the smell of feces? Cool, cool, but then as a tenant what do you propose I do so my building doesn't always smell like shit?

[-] pixxelkick@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Imagine writing out something this unironically reductive and actually hitting the reply button.

SMH

[-] zazo@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

No I mean that's a real case scenario for me - what do you propose I do so my building stops smelling like human shit all the time? is suing my landlord the only course of action?

[-] pixxelkick@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Legally heavily depends on where you live, many places have a step before that where there are legal bodies you can report them to for such things. You'd have to consult your city's help line to get more info and figure out who you talk to about that.

Assuming that somehow doesnt get results then, yes, the next step is suing the landlord for your rent back, which can potentially go in your favor as legally in most places the landlord has a legal duty to maintain the building for the tenant and if they dont do that, you dont owe them rent and can get it back.

this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2024
102 points (73.8% liked)

Housing Bubble 2: Return of the Ugly

221 readers
551 users here now

A community for discussing and documenting the second great housing bubble.

founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS