Sorry, but being a landlord in a non purpose built unit is amoral during a housing crisis. You are making the crisis worse by enriching yourself on the backs of others.
The world isn’t so black and white. Maybe what some landlords are doing is exploitative. However some people do need a place to stay, and renting is an option for them, this is alleviating the housing crisis. What’s he supposed to do sell rather than rent? Say he sells, should he get less than it’s value?
You are giving no options but saying “oh this guy is a hypocrite”, without any more data (is it one house, that seems kind of legit to do), is it a complex of houses and he’s charging above market rates, then maybe yeah he’s a hypocrite – but we don’t know that.
You are in no way alleviating the housing crisis by adding landlords for single family homes. That ONLY raises the prices, unless those landlords are renting below their actual costs and even then the market speculation would still likely make it more expensive for everyone.
You aren’t increasing supply by taking a sale unit off the market and renting it out to make a profit off “providing” someone a basic human need. That concept wouldn’t pass a simple thought experiment.
You are providing a house for people to rent, people who may not be able or willing to by a house. That house is (presumably occupied) reducing the demand.
That ONLY raises the prices
There is still a market for renters, you could make the exact same argument in the opposite direction, by not renting you are only rising the costs of rents.
Now if this was the case, I’d be more in agreement with you, but we simply don’t know.
The VAST majority would rather buy a house. The idea that landlords are helping our people who would like to rent a home is tone deaf given the current state of affairs. I would wager 1% or less would rather rent a home vs buy if they had the option - for what I thought were very obvious reasons.
They aren’t “providing a home to rent”. They removed a home for sale from the market, making buying a new home more expensive, and then rent at a rate that makes you money. So you’re simply adding a middleman to pay. Rents are set based off the sale prices, as sale prices go up, rental prices go up, because that’s the alternative.
Hey, if landlords are creating purpose built rentals, great. But buying up SFH and renting them out as an investment? You’re a parasite.
I’m not a landlord. Ive rented in the past. Ive definitely preferred renting in the past. I don’t view owning a home as an investment, because even if I sell I very likely have to buy in the same market.
I’m not a parasite by your definition.
Maybe since we’ve both provided zero data to back up these speculations we both don’t really know. I’m really not going to go do research.
Sorry, but being a landlord in a non purpose built unit is amoral during a housing crisis. You are making the crisis worse by enriching yourself on the backs of others.
The world isn’t so black and white. Maybe what some landlords are doing is exploitative. However some people do need a place to stay, and renting is an option for them, this is alleviating the housing crisis. What’s he supposed to do sell rather than rent? Say he sells, should he get less than it’s value?
You are giving no options but saying “oh this guy is a hypocrite”, without any more data (is it one house, that seems kind of legit to do), is it a complex of houses and he’s charging above market rates, then maybe yeah he’s a hypocrite – but we don’t know that.
It really isn’t that complicated though…
You are in no way alleviating the housing crisis by adding landlords for single family homes. That ONLY raises the prices, unless those landlords are renting below their actual costs and even then the market speculation would still likely make it more expensive for everyone.
You aren’t increasing supply by taking a sale unit off the market and renting it out to make a profit off “providing” someone a basic human need. That concept wouldn’t pass a simple thought experiment.
You are providing a house for people to rent, people who may not be able or willing to by a house. That house is (presumably occupied) reducing the demand.
There is still a market for renters, you could make the exact same argument in the opposite direction, by not renting you are only rising the costs of rents.
Now if this was the case, I’d be more in agreement with you, but we simply don’t know.
The VAST majority would rather buy a house. The idea that landlords are helping our people who would like to rent a home is tone deaf given the current state of affairs. I would wager 1% or less would rather rent a home vs buy if they had the option - for what I thought were very obvious reasons.
They aren’t “providing a home to rent”. They removed a home for sale from the market, making buying a new home more expensive, and then rent at a rate that makes you money. So you’re simply adding a middleman to pay. Rents are set based off the sale prices, as sale prices go up, rental prices go up, because that’s the alternative.
Hey, if landlords are creating purpose built rentals, great. But buying up SFH and renting them out as an investment? You’re a parasite.
I’m not a landlord. Ive rented in the past. Ive definitely preferred renting in the past. I don’t view owning a home as an investment, because even if I sell I very likely have to buy in the same market.
I’m not a parasite by your definition.
Maybe since we’ve both provided zero data to back up these speculations we both don’t really know. I’m really not going to go do research.