Poor people can’t buy homes and those investors are the same people who make everyone else poor.
Eat the rich
This isn’t the rich, that’s what makes it so sad. These funds are managed by vultures, yes, but these portfolios are quickly bundled and turned into financial instruments, which in turn portions of them are rolled into other funds, which in turn are sold to groups like teachers pension funds, or fractions sold on Robinhood using fancy names that disguise what is in them. These funds are sold not to the rich but to those trying to stay ahead of the meat grinder that is the American capitalist economy. The rich get fees that are completely divorced from how well the funds perform, meanwhile working folk are inadvertently funding and fueling the machine that is making it impossible for them to afford to buy a home.
Should 10x property taxes on non-primary-residences, and split the proceeds between subsidizing construction of new housing and being distributed as a UBI. Would be better than trying to ban speculative investment in housing outright, because it would be attacking the underlying market factors instead of telling investors they can’t try to make a profit.
So can we stop this? Please?
Investors should NOT be allowed to own houses, period. People should own houses. I don’t care if a few people have more than one house and rent that out, small time land lords are fine.
These investment companies are the worst and they destroy everything they touch, everything is immediately scorched earth. Meanwhile we’re in a very preventable global housing crisis, but hey, let’s sell homes to investment companies, because what could possibly go wrong?
Nah, all landlords are leeches. Rent-seeking is literally parasitic by nature.
So everyone who has enough money to rent, but not enough to own, should be homeless? That middle ground of renting has to exist, or we’re overall in a much worse state of affairs. And you can’t rent unless there is a homeowner to rent from.
Also, a lot of people deliberately choose renting over owning, because they value things like not having the financial burden of house maintenance/repairs, or it being orders of magnitude easier to relocate, for whatever reason, and so on.
So everyone who has enough money to rent, but not enough to own, should be homeless?
The concept of someone having enough money to rent but not enough to own is ghoulish in the first place. If my landlord can pay $<1,200 for this house’s mortgage and upkeep, and I can pay $1,200 a month for the right to sleep in it, then we should simply cut out the middle man and have me pay that $<1,200 a month for mortgage and upkeep directly.
The concept of someone having enough money to rent but not enough to own is ghoulish in the first place.
Don’t think you’re being a little dramatic? There are many more costs involved in owning a house than the mortgage payment.
If my landlord can pay $<1,200 for this house’s mortgage and upkeep, and I can pay $1,200 a month for the right to sleep in it, then we should simply cut out the middle man and have me pay that $<1,200 a month for mortgage and upkeep directly.
You’re paying for not having the responsibility to pay for any maintenance/repairs upfront, and for having the ability to easily pack up and move on short notice. If the roof suddenly needs replacing, that’s $9500 on average that you have to pay right now.
Chances are, if you’re financially stable enough that you’d be able to handle things like that without it being a financial catastrophe for you, then you do have enough money to own.
Don’t think you’re being a little dramatic? There are many more costs involved in owning a house than the mortgage payment.
Yes, and my rent covers literally all of them. Again, it has to, or else my landlord would be renting this house at a loss. I don’t want the opportunity to pack up and move on short notice. I’ve lived in this city since I was born, and I intend to die here. I should not be forced to pay a premium for a feature I will never use.
Yes, and my rent covers literally all of them.
So, nothing’s keeping you from buying a house then, since what you already pay in rent covers all of the cost. Right?
I should not be forced to pay a premium for a feature I will never use.
Why haven’t you bought a house already, then? Could it be that it doesn’t just cost what you pay in rent each month?
Do you reckon I’d qualify for a mortgage with my <$30,000/year income and my zero credit history? If you do, I might actually look into it
Could it be that it doesn’t just cost what you pay in rent each month?
Do u reckon every landlord is renting out their houses for a loss??? You get that that’s what you’re implying, right? Like obviously my landlord is better equipped to handle a big expense all at once, but that’s because the cost is amortized across many many months of my rent payments.
So everyone who has enough money to rent, but not enough to own, should be homeless?
Who said that? Other than you?
It’s not that complicated. Without landlords, there is no renting. Without renting, owning is the only way to have a place to live.
So if there’s no renting, and you’re unable to own, you have no place to live.
No, the system should be changed to not arbitrarily restrict people’s access to necessities.
Housing, and other necessities, should be community property. If you don’t live in the house, you forfeit ownership of that house so someone else who needs it can live in it. Fuck the exploitative system of private property ownership.
Renting is only necessitated because we live in a capitalist system. All your complaints only exist because of the capitalist system. It doesn’t need to exist.
Housing, and other necessities, should be community property…Fuck the exploitative system of private property ownership.
So you’d want it to be the case that anyone can enter and live in the house you’re living in, and you have no say in the matter because you don’t own it?
Do you really see no massive problems with such a system?
Holy bad faith Batman. What a blatantly ignorant misrepresentation of what I said.
You have no concept of what a community property system is. For the love of God, go read fucking theory and educate yourself on alternative political and economic systems.
If you live in the house, it becomes your personal property. Meaning you own it while you live and reside there. No one can just come into your personal space. Yet, when you no longer wish to live there and are moving away, the house transfers ownership back to the community until someone needs it.
Holy bad faith Batman.
Pointing out that what you’re saying doesn’t make sense isn’t bad faith.
For the love of God, go read fucking theory
How about ‘for the love of God, define your fucking terms’, if you’re using them in a way inconsistent with colloquial understanding?
No one in everyday life considers “personal property” and “private property” to not be the exact same thing. Stop playing semantic games and communicate normally, if you expect to ever sway anyone. It also helps not to insult people not privy to said semantic games.
If you live in the house, it becomes your personal property. Meaning you own it while you live and reside there. No one can just come into your personal space. Yet, when you no longer wish to live there and are moving away, the house transfers ownership back to the community until someone needs it.
So:
- How, exactly, is it being determined who gets to live there first/next?
- If none of the residents are actually purchasing the house, who’s footing the bill for them all? I’m seeing estimates that the total residential housing in the US carries a value in the area of $45 trillion, with a T. You think you’re getting anywhere near that with tax revenue? And that’s without even considering new construction and repairs to existing construction.
No, I will not define basic fucking terms for you. If you are too ignorant to understand the difference between personal and private property when it comes to systemic analysis of our systems of ownership, the. You’re too fucking ignorant to have an argument with. Go fucking read a book first.
Also, fuck you, I’m autistic and I’ll communicate how I fucking please, shitheel.
So, if I am going to college and I am sick of living in a dorm, i would have to buy a house to live off campus?
Or I get a job offer in another city or state, I have to buy a place to live before I even get to find out if I want to stay long term?Blame the system that makes it arbitrarily difficult to transition between houses, which is in part exacerbated due to the fact homes are being used by parasites as vehicles for profit generation through rent seeking models artificially increasing the floor price of homes.
What you’re mad at is the private property system inherent to capitalism restricting what you’re able to do because of arbitrary bullshit. Why do you need to purchase a house in the first place? It is empty and not being used, so why does the previous owner still retain control over it and be allowed to arbitrarily prevent others from using it unless we can satisfy their greed? Why do we support a system that arbitrarily restricts our access to basic necessities in such a way and just glazes over such blatant exploitation?
Instead of trying to justify exploitation under the current system, how about we think about changing this system to one based on the needs of people instead of one based on imaginary, monetary interests and the whims of greedy fucks who retain illegitimate control over what should rightfully belong to the community?
In a system of community property, any vacant homes would be readily available and the ownership of units transferred from communal to personal property based on usufruct where, so long as you live in the home, it belongs to you but, when you vacate to a new home, the ownership is transferred back to the community.
So, is the community forced to purchase the house if someone moves out? Or is it more of a renting situation and you never actually own your home, you just rent it from the community and when you move you lose all effort and time you have put into improving your home?
All you have to do is look at the military “on base” housing to see how bad places can get if you never own anything. And I am not really sure that I would want to live in an apartment situation my entire life. I already think things like “eminent domain” are bullshit, but I can’t even conceive of how truly dystopian it would be to have your housing controlled by the government and whatever whacko managed to claw their way into power most recently.I do not have time or patience to educate you. Go read theory on alternative economic systems.
Please, for the love of God educate yourself. You limit yourself by only thinking of this in terms of the current, highly exploitative capitalist system.
It would look fundamentally different from anything that currently exists today.
Ouch, so it is an assigned housing situation where the government gets to decide where and how you live…
No, it isn’t. Jesus Christ you people are intentionally interpreting this in bad faith or just lack reading comprehension.
We’re chickens stuck inside investors slaughterhouse.
Nothing will meaningfully improve until the rich fear for their lives
While these investors are absolutely soulless and deserve to be called out, there’s another aspect of this problem that I feel doesn’t get talked about enough.
If we just built enough housing this problem would go away. And it would be easy if we had a system that allowed people to build new things and undercut competition. But we can’t because regulations make it nearly impossible to make anything other than houses.
People investing on houses are a symptom of the larger overall problem, of there not being enough fucking housing.
If we just built enough housing this problem would go away.
Fun fact: there are more vacant homes than there are homeless. By a factor of 28. We have the homes, we just need to let people own them
Yes of course, but how do you propose we get that to happen?
Why are these homes empty in the first place? Are they in the same places where housing is needed?
And even if you could house all homeless people, that still leaves the problem of the crushing expense of housing in many places.
This might be an unpopular opinion but housing should be classified as a human right.
Government officials should not be allowed to own rental property… problem solved.
This is absolutely terrible for working people and the economy as a whole. Gatekeeping which ultimately brings down everyone including the investors who hold it above the heads of others.
blow the bubble
Funny how housing prices are conveniently all falling
