Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SuspiciouslySuspect2 t1_jd47mxz wrote

Reply to comment by shawnwasim in Kansas City prevented hundreds of evictions by providing attorneys. Now the program is growing by cragar79

>I'm not talking about the banks, I'm talking about individual landlords who take the risk.

You said lender. The landlord is the owner. Man you're on a roll today.

Also, Investment? Risk? My goodness what a combination! No investment has ever had risk before. /s

>You're talking as if landlords are just handed properties out of thin air, they earned their assets.

Incorrect. They earned the DOWN-PAYMENT of that asset.

Then the landlord claimed "FIRST" on the property in question, and arrange to have their tenant pay the remaining balance of the property. Often gaining passive income monthly as a result.

The flaws in such a system are obvious. Assuming the landlord makes 0 profit on either the sale or monthly costs, they are able to purchase assets on a 5 to 1 advantage compared to non-landlords, assuming a down-payment of 20%. 20% five times adds to 100%, you see.

Mix in HELOCs and the fact that land does in fact appreciate over time... It's supremely rigged in favor of those who have existing capital. The landlording of single family homes is right behind oil barrens and war-profiteers in making the world a worse place to their own enrichment.

Even done on a high density scale (low and high rise apartments), it should be much more heavily regulated, and ideally run at a net zero by municipal governments or nonprofit NGOs.

2

shawnwasim t1_jd4abz7 wrote

Lol alright man whatever you say. You obviously don't see the risk even though its screwing individuals over. Keep complaining about the system while nothing will happen because your frustration is directed at the wrong thing. And yeah lets have local governments and NGOs own land, I'm sure you've thoroughly researched market economies to know that would surely work.

0

SuspiciouslySuspect2 t1_jd4bfn0 wrote

>Lol alright man whatever you say. You obviously don't see the risk even though its screwing individuals over. Keep complaining about the system while nothing will happen because your frustration is directed at the wrong thing. And yeah lets have local governments and NGOs own land, I'm sure you've thoroughly researched market economies to know that would surely work.

I'm saying we should change the system that clearly isn't meeting the needs of society. As in, something new. You need to try to get data.

You seem to advocating for a "got mine, fuck you" approach, afraid to try a different system because it might have some possible negative impact for you, in spite of the fact it could tremendously help others. Which, you're free to do. And I'm free to point out that's selfish as fuck.

Glad to see you've run out of any logical rebuttal though. Because there really isn't one that doesn't make one sound selfish.

1

shawnwasim t1_jd4f16f wrote

I have 0 rental properties. You dont have to be a landlord to see individuals getting screwed after the covid rental blocks.

0

SuspiciouslySuspect2 t1_jd4g1ab wrote

Wait wait wait.

I'm just going to suspend my disbelief and answer this assuming 100% honesty on your part.

You're advocating to maintain the system in a way that will impact YOU negatively, correct? You want to maintain the inequality of the current system because... You look at those who have all the economic advantages, and sympathize with their minor setbacks? As opposed to the massive crisis of people who NO LONGER HAVE HOMES as the practice of landlording forces more and more people onto the street?

MAN, your head must be a WILD place to be.

1

shawnwasim t1_jd4k88t wrote

Please tell me, elaborate even, on how an individual who owns an extra property is not being harmed by their tenant not paying them since april 2020?

1

SuspiciouslySuspect2 t1_jd4l79j wrote

I've stated this repeatedly. Nobody is forcing them to continue owning the property.

They may sell at any moment, and eliminate the problem.

They chose to buy into an exploitative business model and are being burned, just a little. If you go bankrupt from your tenant not paying rent, you couldn't afford that property, could you? Walk away, make better choices.

1

shawnwasim t1_jd4piu1 wrote

LOOOL okay now I just feel like you're messing around

1

SuspiciouslySuspect2 t1_jd4gbfq wrote

Addendum: those individuals could sell if they're not having fun. One more property on the property market to be owner by the occupant.

0

lil_hyphy t1_jd6oqth wrote

The individuals that are getting screwed over, as he explained, are tenants. The system of landlording is designed to screw over tenants and enrich landlords. That’s why it’s hard to cry for you. Your system of exploitation stopped working so good, big whoop. You’ve still got way more assets and capital than any of the people you’re taking advantage of because the checks notes need a place to live.

1