General Discussion

Travelman

(708 posts)

239. Because some of us actually PREFER to rent

Thu Aug 6, 2015, 02:07 PM

Aug 2015

I've been a homeowner. It frequently is a colossal, throbbing pain in the ass. As a renter, if my air conditioner goes tits-up (as it did a few weeks back), then fixing it is someone else's problem (that would be the eeeevvviiiillll landlord) and they get it fixed. As a homeowner, when my air conditioner went tits-up, I had to spend days shopping around with different contractors before I eventually wrote a $5500 check to someone to replace the damn thing.

I'm not an HVAC expert. I'm not a plumbing expert. I'm not an electrical expert. I'm not a structural expert. I don't know shit about most of that stuff, but I had to learn a bunch of that stuff and I had to break my balls to do things like seal an eighth of an acre of asphalt driveway in the blazing July heat because I was a homeowner and that sort of shit has to be done. I had to sit in my crawlspace, folded in a most unnatural fashion, with a blowtorch replacing a pipe when it was eighteen degrees below zero Fahrenheit at 2:00 in the morning because I was a homeowner. I had to go out and take a chainsaw to a tree that fell onto a neighbor's property in a blinding rainstorm because I was a homeowner.

No thanks. I'll stick with renting. Much less trouble to let the experts deal with the problems.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

240 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why not outlaw landlordism? [View all] True Blue Door Aug 2015 OP

Western Civ would collapse immediately pscot Aug 2015 #1

Hence the point about unfolding gradually. But do you see anything wrong in theory? True Blue Door Aug 2015 #2

Property rights are the keystone of Liberal governance pscot Aug 2015 #17

That's a radically libertarian position to take. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #22

Not libertarian; Historical pscot Aug 2015 #24

Libertarian. And no property rights are violated in this scenario. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #125

Commerce clause only covers interstate and international commerce Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2015 #86

According to Libertarians, not the jurisprudence of the 20th and 21st centuries. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #126

This might come as a surprise to you but real estate and in-state corporate law Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2015 #155

Um, no. That's quite false. Fantastic Anarchist Aug 2015 #35

I'm struggling to think of examples FreeJoe Aug 2015 #93

Cliven Bundy enjoys a great deal of political and personal freedom while using public property. ieoeja Aug 2015 #225

Those are your examples? FreeJoe Aug 2015 #236

"Socialism". I do not think it means what you think it means. ieoeja Aug 2015 #240

Not quite. The concept called 'commons' was a part of property rights until PatrickforO Aug 2015 #83

Doesn't make right, though. Does it? cheapdate Aug 2015 #205

Land owners do compensate the public on an ongoing basis. Ace Rothstein Aug 2015 #218

Yes, property taxes are a real thing. cheapdate Aug 2015 #222

The Constitution has nothing at all to say about what sorts of entities can be "property" eridani Aug 2015 #214

+1 cheapdate Aug 2015 #223

+2 Fantastic Anarchist Aug 2015 #238

So... that's a vote FOR the idea, then? Scootaloo Aug 2015 #152

How do you plan on seizing tens, if not hundreds, of billions of dollars in private property? Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2015 #3

What are you talking about "seize"? Did you actually read the OP? True Blue Door Aug 2015 #4

Seize? Eh - I think you're rubbing up against the 4th amendment...nt jonno99 Aug 2015 #7

How? There's no "seizure" of anything. None even implied. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #8

regulating property to such a degree that it loses most of its value geek tragedy Aug 2015 #14

Simple fix: Compensatory tax deduction for those who purchased before. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #21

GT is correct. You run into the 5th amendment "Takings Clause" - which deals with jonno99 Aug 2015 #28

This objection has already been addressed. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #123

"this would indeed work" - I'm sorry, but I missed the response(s) in agreement. jonno99 Aug 2015 #130

I'm sorry, I missed the bit about reality being a democracy. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #134

Looks like you've got it covered. However, I'm curious - jonno99 Aug 2015 #143

Yes. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #144

I think you underestimate the size of the "special cases" group. jonno99 Aug 2015 #159

Tax deduction for the landowners, and grandfather on a case by case basis... cherokeeprogressive Aug 2015 #47

I don't think so FreeJoe Aug 2015 #95

The difference is that everyone who owns real property in California pays taxes on it. Everyone. cherokeeprogressive Aug 2015 #197

Don't we have a lot targeted taxes and tax deductions? FreeJoe Aug 2015 #237

You are depriving people of the free use of their private property. Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2015 #43

I think it would be a type of seizure if the government were suddenly to decree pnwmom Aug 2015 #151

I think you'd have better luck outlawing snark & sarcasm...nt jonno99 Aug 2015 #5

Real estate is a regulated for-profit industry, not a Constitutional right. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #9

Au contraire pscot Aug 2015 #19

There's no Constitutional right to profit. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #23

This message was self-deleted by its author jonno99 Aug 2015 #34

The constitution doesn't bestow rights, it keeps government from interfering with inherent rights. Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2015 #79

The Constitution grants the government explicit authority to regulate commerce. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #92

It can't regulate intra-state commerce. Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2015 #112

I agree with your conclusion, but not your reasoning. Adrahil Aug 2015 #115

Jury nullification? n/t Uncle Joe Aug 2015 #196

The idea of the Constitution was Yupster Aug 2015 #212

There goes tenantism BeyondGeography Aug 2015 #6

Meaning? True Blue Door Aug 2015 #11

You should know the meaning. NCTraveler Aug 2015 #102

There would be a lot of homeless people LittleBlue Aug 2015 #10

You didn't read the entire OP, did you? True Blue Door Aug 2015 #12

I did LittleBlue Aug 2015 #20

Then you're basically making the conservative argument about taxes: True Blue Door Aug 2015 #25

That isn't true LittleBlue Aug 2015 #52

Holding on to property would be an unsustainable business decision. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #120

Ugh, really? geek tragedy Aug 2015 #13

Yes, really. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #33

Well, there is the "long run" problem. rogerashton Aug 2015 #15

Actually that's a long-run solution. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #44

Materials cost money. jeff47 Aug 2015 #176

My air conditioned just broke down Yupster Aug 2015 #213

What would you do with all the 2nd and 3rd mortgages already on the books? nt. Juicy_Bellows Aug 2015 #16

Grandfather, or tax credit, or some other combination of mitigations. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #45

You would blow up municipal budgets across the country hack89 Aug 2015 #18

That is an interesting point. Let's think about that. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #49

People who own today will be under a mountain of debt hack89 Aug 2015 #61

I literally addressed that in the very first sentence of the comment you're replying to. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #91

The government is not going to give hundreds of thousands of dollars to millions of home owners hack89 Aug 2015 #94

total US mortgage debt is $11.6 trillion. Amishman Aug 2015 #106

LOL. It would cost about 1/4 of the money spent on Fed bailouts after 2008. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #118

Where did the 2008 bailout money come from? True Blue Door Aug 2015 #121

Clearly you never owed a home yeoman6987 Aug 2015 #101

I've both owned and rented, and owned rentals too whatthehey Aug 2015 #136

"Renters pay for all that just not in discrete chunks" - and THAT is the essence of the problem - jonno99 Aug 2015 #156

You are mistaken about the economics. Ms. Toad Aug 2015 #209

That was a huge problem in the Great Depression. And why income taxes are better. ieoeja Aug 2015 #66

Ummmm 1939 Aug 2015 #110

Yes, but with an income tax you are taxing the people who CAN pay and ONLY the people who can pay. ieoeja Aug 2015 #224

Let's see 1939 Aug 2015 #230

I think you're wrong on #4. ieoeja Aug 2015 #233

The banks paid fines because they did the foreclosures illegally 1939 Aug 2015 #234

Only bought, sold, or used by the owner? SheilaT Aug 2015 #26

I'm mainly wondering about the large-scale economic effect. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #54

You're delusional if you think that SheilaT Aug 2015 #153

My guess is this plan would be loopholed to death Yupster Aug 2015 #215

What would people who have to rent do? Reter Aug 2015 #27

But apparently (reading between the OP lines) you can afford property taxes...nt jonno99 Aug 2015 #31

He's already paying them, likely at higher rates whatthehey Aug 2015 #57

For the record: the rent I charge does *not* cover my costs. ieoeja Aug 2015 #227

You have to rent because real estate prices are artificially inflated by landlords and speculators. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #55

So houses will drop down to 1980 prices? Reter Aug 2015 #58

If you read the post laundry_queen Aug 2015 #60

Glory be that this will never come true yeoman6987 Aug 2015 #107

What kind of post is that? laundry_queen Aug 2015 #184

I have replies all through the thread yeoman6987 Aug 2015 #207

As a landlord of exactly one property Lee-Lee Aug 2015 #29

The "minimum cost" of houses is something every contractor laughs about privately. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #63

I'm betting you have never owned a home Lee-Lee Aug 2015 #147

"You could have transfers of ownership that are shares in the property" lumberjack_jeff Aug 2015 #150

ha! tammywammy Aug 2015 #169

No, it's not what we do today. We take out loans TexasMommaWithAHat Aug 2015 #178

LOL- in the end what this half-backed idea would result in is rent being replaced with Lee-Lee Aug 2015 #219

What if, when the person who "bought" a room in the house....... WillowTree Aug 2015 #235

As the son of a life-long contractor, that's bullshit. X_Digger Aug 2015 #174

Sounds a lot like Communism... TreasonousBastard Aug 2015 #30

I would say it's more perfectly capitalistic than the present system. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #67

The systems humans come up with are organic olddots Aug 2015 #32

"The main reason I have been at odds with money" I'm curious: other than bartering, jonno99 Aug 2015 #38

Didn't you ever think they might just tear it down and take a loss... Historic NY Aug 2015 #36

A total loss rather than a lower profit? Bullshit. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #70

Yes. It's called bankruptcy. nt. NCTraveler Aug 2015 #104

In which case the property would be auctioned off anyway, and they'd see none of the proceeds. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #129

Correct. NCTraveler Aug 2015 #166

You think they're going to care about the difference between a $300,000 loss and a $305,000 loss? nt jeff47 Aug 2015 #181

Most insurance companies, banks, and pension funds are heavily invested in REITS JCMach1 Aug 2015 #37

The simple (though by no means easy) solution would just be to guarantee them all. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #73

Is this from The Onion? Snobblevitch Aug 2015 #39

Post removed Post removed Aug 2015 #74

Are You? ProfessorGAC Aug 2015 #131

I think the UK tried this with its council housing. Starry Messenger Aug 2015 #40

Thanks, that would be interesting reading. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #77

The folks that own property are the ones that make the laws... ileus Aug 2015 #41

Only because the rest let them. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #78

Let's outlaw carbon dioxide next. I hear it contributes to global warming FSogol Aug 2015 #42

CO2 is a molecule. Landlordism is a business arrangement. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #80

Yes. That poster is a real tea party supporter. NCTraveler Aug 2015 #105

Except I haven't heard a single objection that withstands the simplest scrutiny. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #114

You have heard tons of well thought out reasons why. NCTraveler Aug 2015 #167

You don't think that people needing to live somewhere for only a short time SheilaT Aug 2015 #217

You were the subject of an alert. I was juror number 5. guillaumeb Aug 2015 #172

This isn't a good idea mythology Aug 2015 #46

I've addressed most of this in earlier comments, but I'll reiterate here. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #88

How does this make sense whatthehey Aug 2015 #133

Y is not the value of a property. Y is the value of property that someone's income lets them buy. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #137

And what do you think will replace the mortgage? TexasMommaWithAHat Aug 2015 #185

You are in the running for first place FYI...probably will at least get 2nd snooper2 Aug 2015 #48

First place in what? True Blue Door Aug 2015 #132

Wait - what if I WANT to rent? nt jonno99 Aug 2015 #50

That's what hotels are for. Cleita Aug 2015 #53

Ok - but what if I like the idea of renting a house - something bigger than a hotel w/ one-room? nt jonno99 Aug 2015 #59

Explain why you would rather do that and pay a rent expense instead of Cleita Aug 2015 #64

Many folks - especially those who are older like their own (quiet) space, but jonno99 Aug 2015 #72

I'm never for one size fits all, but trends where there might be a few exceptions, not enough Cleita Aug 2015 #82

Why is it illegal for a landlord to rent real estate, but a hotel can? NT 1939 Aug 2015 #113

It's a different type of business. Cleita Aug 2015 #119

Not the way the OP states it 1939 Aug 2015 #128

It's just speculation. So don't worry your head over it. eom Cleita Aug 2015 #135

That's illegal under this proposal. A hotel is renting out property. (nt) jeff47 Aug 2015 #179

You're asking what if you WANT to pay an exorbitant markup for the same living arrangement? True Blue Door Aug 2015 #139

Silly argument. If I want to quit my job for another job, I am free to do so. If jonno99 Aug 2015 #228

Well, I never liked the idea of owning an apartment, but it's Cleita Aug 2015 #51

Yes, that's the general idea: To reunite ownership and usage. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #141

Well, there was a time on earth when landlordism didn't exist. And this thread ... Auggie Aug 2015 #56

The (unstated?) false premise of the OP is that "landlordism" is a BAD THING. But, like everything jonno99 Aug 2015 #62

The OP just opened the subject for theoretical discussion ... Auggie Aug 2015 #76

Agreed. Too, it should be understood that the landlord/tenant relationship is not jonno99 Aug 2015 #85

I am sort of for the extended family living, if not under the same roof, on the same property. Cleita Aug 2015 #90

"Modern life" - it's sad really. How did we get to the place where old age (hopefully with wisdom) jonno99 Aug 2015 #108

There always have been landlords. Often they were known as lords, Kings or Cleita Aug 2015 #68

Well not always though. whatthehey Aug 2015 #75

Or in later times even as late as the eighteenth century, everything you owned technically belonged Cleita Aug 2015 #84

Go further back in time ... Auggie Aug 2015 #81

Lemme see. Nomadic tribes don't own property other than their tents and sheep or Cleita Aug 2015 #87

Probably, then, with the development of agriculture and/or domestication of livestock ... Auggie Aug 2015 #97

No. Good hunting grounds were very valuable before agriculture. (nt) jeff47 Aug 2015 #183

Are you suggesting hunting grounds were "available for lease" by those that laid claimed to them? Auggie Aug 2015 #188

No, I'm saying one tribe would claim ownership over them jeff47 Aug 2015 #193

That's not a landlord situation then. Auggie Aug 2015 #199

Sure it is. jeff47 Aug 2015 #200

Not sure but certainly pre-classical Rome whatthehey Aug 2015 #69

Poverty too. Always been there, so let's do nothing about it. True Blue Door Aug 2015 #142

We need to End Real Estate as a Commodity Market daredtowork Aug 2015 #65

You are right. Cleita Aug 2015 #71

I wonder how easy it would be to get a home loan in a depressed housing market, especially hughee99 Aug 2015 #89

That's not allowed in the OP scheme - "real estate could not be ... borrowed against" muriel_volestrangler Aug 2015 #99

Lol. Wow. Sorry but thankfully this is just talk. yeoman6987 Aug 2015 #116

If you can't borrow against real estate, then only people with cash on hand would be able to buy, hughee99 Aug 2015 #122

No, OP is claiming houses would cost 1/5th the cost of a car. jeff47 Aug 2015 #186

Well shit, that wouldn't even be worth what it costs to build it, hughee99 Aug 2015 #201

That's the OP's plan - make land nearly worthless. jeff47 Aug 2015 #202

I assumed the OP was talking about the house (structure) specifically. hughee99 Aug 2015 #204

Why stop there? Let's outlaw profit while we're at it. Throd Aug 2015 #96

Renting is a wonderful option for people in society. NCTraveler Aug 2015 #98

Can't POSSIBLY account for the myriad situations that exist, elleng Aug 2015 #100

A bit like rent control FreeJoe Aug 2015 #103

I move every few years... Positrons Aug 2015 #109

ok hill2016 Aug 2015 #111

Sometimes renting makes sense. Adrahil Aug 2015 #117

I'm a good, kind, landlord PasadenaTrudy Aug 2015 #124

That would be financially destructive to many of the poor who need mobility. Xithras Aug 2015 #127

This idea is dumber than the no air conditioning thread someone started a few weeks back. Ace Rothstein Aug 2015 #138

They lived in a state where it rarely gets over 90 degrees? alphafemale Aug 2015 #158

boredom nt steve2470 Aug 2015 #163

a silly idea - some folks like to rent - they do not want to be burdened with home ownership DrDan Aug 2015 #140

Could hotels still rent rooms or would they have to "sell" them? onenote Aug 2015 #145

I want to rent. Specifically I want to rent space in a house/neighborhood than I couldn afford on my alphafemale Aug 2015 #146

Poorly conceived. lumberjack_jeff Aug 2015 #148

This is just unworkable. Even assuming people agreed to this concept (and no one would), MADem Aug 2015 #149

You would create a situation where there are huge numbers of empty houses GitRDun Aug 2015 #154

In our area there is a 1/2% vacancy rate & housing costs are high. Many students.... Hekate Aug 2015 #157

What a dumb idea. n/t Lil Missy Aug 2015 #160

Don't ban it. Tax rent seeking at a reasonable rate Taitertots Aug 2015 #161

Taxes are paid on income received from rental property. Property taxes are paid on rental property. Thinkingabout Aug 2015 #190

+1 jonno99 Aug 2015 #231

As a long-time tenant, I can speak to this easily steve2470 Aug 2015 #162

I Posted above. alphafemale Aug 2015 #182

yes, renting works for a large number of people steve2470 Aug 2015 #187

Fridge breaks. tree crashes the roof? alphafemale Aug 2015 #191

yep, one of the beauties of renting! nt steve2470 Aug 2015 #192

So many people I know have been paying a mortgage for years alphafemale Aug 2015 #194

yea that's a sad situation nt steve2470 Aug 2015 #195

What's really funny about this thread MFrohike Aug 2015 #164

there are at least two fatal economic issues hill2016 Aug 2015 #165

Why do you assume people don't want to rent? Travis_0004 Aug 2015 #168

I like it SoLeftIAmRight Aug 2015 #170

Lolno. X_Digger Aug 2015 #171

No thanks, I owned for over 20 years and am much happier renting independentpiney Aug 2015 #173

So in your world, houses sprout out of the ground for free? jeff47 Aug 2015 #175

Good idea but can't be done without some radical transformation of the underlying order Cheese Sandwich Aug 2015 #177

the cost of materials lancer78 Aug 2015 #180

Bad idea. Blue_In_AK Aug 2015 #189

That's a fairly traditional pattern. hunter Aug 2015 #206

^^ THIS ^^ nt jonno99 Aug 2015 #229

Economics of being a landlord 1939 Aug 2015 #198

With you 100%. n/t cheapdate Aug 2015 #203

You still have not addressed the issue of those SheilaT Aug 2015 #208

Yes, I've paid nearly 100K in rent where I live. I could have had a home, but couldn't make a down. freshwest Aug 2015 #210

Any term with a "lord" in it is about feudalism, period n/t eridani Aug 2015 #211

Or - NOT, period. jonno99 Aug 2015 #232

sounds like a Chamber of Commerce solution DrDan Aug 2015 #216

If real estate could not be borrowed against, then SheilaT Aug 2015 #220

It would change the college experience, that's for sure. Orrex Aug 2015 #221

Nope - would never agree to this n/t JustAnotherGen Aug 2015 #226

Because some of us actually PREFER to rent Travelman Aug 2015 #239