KevonLooney @ KevonLooney @lemm.ee

Posts

28

Comments

2,035

Joined

2 yr. ago

You are assuming that market rent is not already as high as demand allows. That's not true. It is. That's the definition of market rent.

Good point. It's not news that "you learned" something. What is your conclusion?. What is your reasoning? If it's been said before, we can just read that.

Did you forget that Biden was in the Senate for decades? All they do is make speeches 99% of the time they are in the chamber.

Notice how Trump is only good in front of a friendly crowd. Biden has spoken publicly and privately in front of people who dislike him for most of his life. Biden is practicing now, and I suspect he will make Trump look like a fool.

They are. And they're comparing glorious revolutionary China to the dastardly imperialist pig dogs in the US.

Tankies are a confused bunch.

Rent depends on the rental market, but most likely yes. That's not different from now though. If you improve your rental property, you get more money from it.

You might not know this, but a mortgage being higher than the rent isn't abnormal. In the past, when interest rates were 8% and rents were lower, you lost money on a rental property for the first few years. Property is not a license to print money. It's an investment with costs and payoffs.

The property owner can pay off the mortgage early with the money. Or they can buy another place to rent out. Or diversify into other kinds of investments. No one is banned from anything.

They are paying you for the property. If you don't want that, why do you rent it out? You can't use it once they lease it from you. You're a financial owner, not a resident anymore.

Why would one more person who's interested in buying the property hurt? When you sell a home are you upset that people want to hand you money? No, because you are moving out and it's now a financial decision.

That's another benefit: you might improve the home to maximize the appraisal. That would help tenants.

Of course your property tax would be based on a higher appraisal too, so you probably wouldn't go overboard.

True, but don't underestimate the value of finding a good tenant. Most landlords would rather have a stable tenant than a few extra $100s. It costs a month or more in rent to find a new person.

Here's what you're forgetting: as a percent owner in the home you are entitled to a portion of the rent and a portion of the sale price. As you buy more, your rent goes down. You are saving money.

These are good points, but you say that you don't rent anything out. Anyone who owns property in an LLC with another person deals with issues like this. They are not insurmountable.

Yes, this would make lots of small landlords think twice about renting their property out. That's actually a good thing because they could either sell or let family stay there for free.

The point is to make people who don't want to deal with the hassle sell. People like you wouldn't be affected.

Good point. I think this process would only happen when the owner doesn't live primarily in the home. I.e. financial owners.

The real issue is vacation or short-term rentals. There would have to be minimum time limits like 3 or 6 months to avoid having a million tiny owners.

Do you have an article about this?

It's an option to buy, not a requirement for the renter.

And the landlord has already made their choice for someone else to live in the home. They are being fairly paid for the property. They can always use that money to buy another one.

Isn't that what landlords tell renters? If you don't like it, just buy another one?

How would that actually work? Co-ops work just like a corporation, you buy shares one apartment at a time. There are no options.

I feel like the record keeping in your idea and mine would be the hardest part. Basically every home that is rented out would have to be a mini corporation with shares available for purchase.

You sound confused as to the definitions of those words. "Renter" and "rentee" are the same person: one who rents from a landlord. Neither renters are forced to do anything. They have the option to buy.

In case it's not clear, my idea is different because it is not optional. It's a condition of renting property. Basically, the person or persons paying the lease have an undeniable right to buy the property.

Al Jazeera is both:

• Sponsored by the Qatari government
• The best journalism in the Middle East

Don't trust their reporting on Qatar, but everything else is pretty good. While other networks rely on second hand info, Al Jazeera will send reporters into literal war zones to find out the truth.

Exactly my thought.

Ok, I'll get right on that. 🚶🏼‍♂️

This writer proposes very little in the way of actual policies. And this subject has been covered many times over, by better writers. They seem to be very inwardly focused on their own Ashkenazi experience and only mention the latest bogeyman (bogeyperson?) of transgender people.

Read W. E. B. DuBois's book "The Souls of Black Folk". In the introduction he describes well meaning liberals who don't actually understand him like this:

they say, I know an excellent colored man in my town; or, I fought at Mechanicsville; or, Do not these Southern outrages make your blood boil? At these I smile, or am interested, or reduce the boiling to a simmer, as the occasion may require. To the real question, How does it feel to be a problem? I answer seldom a word.

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/408/408-h/408-h.htm

Read this amazingly piece of classic literature, not some opinion piece written to fill a word count.