Do you think its fair that people are allowed to buy a lot of properties and other people pay rent?

[foxsquirrell]

Surely a person does not need that much property to live. Then why do some people buy more property then they need. Obviously it can only be to squeeze money from people through rent or mortgage. Do you think this is right?

I think it is one of the worse things allowed in a society. And it can only be that politicians are in collusion with these land owners, otherwise they would have addressed it long ago.

If this practice was restrained, many people would not need to slave for 25 or 30 years to own there home. This is what governments should address first and foremost. Exploitation under the guise of many legal terms.

Yes, people can buy as many property as they like

No, there should be a limit on how much property a person is allowed to own

[Effably]

I don't really know about fair. I can perfectly understand a stance in which one should be allowed to buy and own many houses if they want, but its not like we do not impose restrictions on other things we find immoral.

Historically it was not truly allowed. Roll time back to year 0, 500 or 1000 and it was forbidden. Or rather it was forbidden to profit on it. You could own the whole city if you'd like but it was illegal to rent things out. So there was little monetary incentive. And people would have likely stopped you if you tried to cheat the system. The church forbade this sort of thing for a reason. So yes, the whole Landlord idea was something so abusable that for the longest time no one was allowed to do it. Then the church granted itself the right, by attaching work to accommodation and asking for a percentage of the output. It took a very long time until morals became immoral enough to be okay with it.

Some countries like China have restrictions on how many houses you can own in each area. That doesn't stop someone from owning a lot between their family and extended family but it does prevent companies from purchasing up homes to sit on them.

I think for the simple reason the free market lacks incentive to create "affordable housing" it should be the governments task to step in. Whether that is by building a whole bunch or restricting how much someone can buy or profit from it is a much more complicated discussion. But the situation will be unbearable in a generation or two, so it is about time to act.

[slatyb]

"Lacks incentive" means that in many areas there is no way for private developers to build housing at a price that would allow it to be leased at an "affordable rate". In Seattle it costs a minimum of $300,000 / unit to build apartments. It is not possible to rent a $300,000 apartment for $1500/month.

[Effably]

It also means that for 400 000$ you can instead rent for 3000$ / month. Which is the real problem.

It is most certainly not a matter of not generating income. It is entirely a matter of market manipulation. We can dive into it but this is an area where at times building and leaving it empty is the best decision. Not because renting it out is bad income but because inflating the value to nonsensical values, taking that money and investing it elsewhere provides more. The housing market is one of the worst and most exploited markets we have.

[lightbulb27]

it's a good question. Thsi is an outcropping of the corruption of our currency... inflation... and some are succeeding and others succumb and fail.

It is a problem... but then again, a lot of people that buy houses, will fail in upkeep and the huge costs... and lose them. in some ways, they belong renting until they can learn responsibility to own.

I think corporations buying up lots... is a problem.

[foxsquirrell]

Exactly corporations (which are a few people under some legal title) gobble up huge amounts of recourses like property to feed their greed. Which means at the end of the day, people working for them. They ought to be hanged.

[lightbulb27]

that's how revolutions occur.

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

According to our capitalistic system, it’s fair because they bought it with the money they earned. Proposing limits like this is something closer to socialism and the idea that everyone has the legal right to something they need to survive and, as such, has a legal entitlement to it according to the governing body.

[foxsquirrell]

Yeah that's one glaring area where your capitalist system is wrong, because it allows people to take advantage of other people to the point were people are reduced to slaves. Call it what you want, these limits are fair. I am not saying that people should be given free land or free houses. I am saying that the supply of land and houses should not be allowed to accumulate in the hands of a few people, so that ordinary people will have the opportunity to buy there own house in say 10 years time not a life time. It is extremely evil this system of yours when it forces people to work for the best part of there lives just to buy one home. It is exploitation plain and simple, and the people who are part of it are enemies of the people pure and simple.

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

As we know it now, they’re not doing anything wrong by doing this. I’m all on board for making sure people have housing but the laws don’t reflect much beyond the current status quo of rich=better than everyone else

[foxsquirrell]

Well then I hope you did not vote yes if you want to help people with housing! And this is the main way to help. A law that prohibits any one individual to have more than a set amount of property. Because otherwise you are going to find people who know how to make a business and have the opportunity to make a business and they will start gobbling up everything like Pac Man.
This is the same story like De Beers the diamond company. Diamonds are actually affordable, but because the few (or one) took control of all or most of the diamond mines they can keep the supply of diamonds in the market low and it follows that the prices of diamonds remain sky high. You see the evil nature of these organisations to siphon profits from people?

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

Of course I didn’t vote republican lol

[slatyb]

This is fundamentally a problem of high demand and short supply. Why is supply short? Because it's expensive to build new housing. Why is it expensive to build? There is a shortage of places to build. Why? Because much of the land in cities is zoned for single-family housing. Why don't we change the zoning? Because the homeowners do not want more people in their neighborhood. It increases noise and traffic congestion and reduces their quality of life.

[midnightmoon05]

Curious what country you are from and how is the housing system work there?

[foxsquirrell]

It works the same. Private entities can buy as much property as they want, and sell it back at a much higher price. That's is why they buy it. Not to live in it. They cannot live in 10 houses at the same time. Nor does it make much sense to hop from one house to another just for fun. Its to squeeze lakes of money from the population pool. So then if you are starting your life and you want to buy a house you will find that they are already bought and they are being sold at a price which will enslave you for the good part of your life. Say 25 years or so. Instead of being able to work for 10 years to own a house. That's how it is here too. And the politicians are in collusion because they let them, and who knows if they get some of the profits to behind the scenes. I am in Europe. EU country.

[midnightmoon05]

I agree in EU (if they are all the same policy). I know if one have to pay 50% income tax… with low salaries…. its impossible to but a small flat to start as a young person and with home prices going so high due to various reasons. In your case, you say it’s the government allowing corporations to buy up properties.

In the US, most can still buy properties … yes more than one and live comfortably.

[byte03]

Totally agree. It's crazy how housing, something so basic, has turned into a tool for profit. There should absolutely be limits.

[foxsquirrell]

Thanks, at least there are some people with a brain and with a moral conscience who sees this whole thing for what it is.

[byte03]

Yeah, like, people need places to live 🤷🏻‍♂️

[BonzoInBitburg]

3 of my kids bought houses without any help from me before they turned 25 and they paid for their own education. If they can do it, anyone can do it.

[foxsquirrell]

What does this has to do with what I said? I mean does it contradict anything I mentioned?

[slatyb]

There are many people who prefer renting to owning. That means someone else has to purchase and maintain the property and lease it to them. Renting property is not evil.

[foxsquirrell]

On the other hand there are many more people who wish to get out of rent but can't because of the high prices. Plus why rent when you can repay the bank and in say 10 years you'll have a house of your own. Its very evil that they take hold of all the recourses in order to put the price up. Very high up they put it so they can live off other people. That's how some people are so rich, because they live off other people.

[slatyb]

Why rent?
1. I don't want to own a house. I don't want to pay to maintain the building and the grounds, nor do I want to do the work myself. I'm happy in an urban flat.

2. I have a great deal on the flat I am renting in Seattle. We looked at buying but quickly learned that we could put $100,000 down and would still be paying more per month for a condo we would not like as well. Instead of making a higher payment over the past ten years, I invested it all and I'm far wealthier than I would have been if I had used it to pay a mortgage.

[foxsquirrell]

So you did want to buy! Even though you start buy saying that you don't want a house. You did want to have your own property. Again as I said, if a few individuals did not own so many properties you would have afforded that property you talked about.
But then again if you want to pay rent do as you want. You will always find odd ones. But the vast masses out there would want to have an opportunity to buy a property in say 10 years. It is for them that I am talking. And for myself of course.

[slatyb]

We didn't want to buy when we arrived in Seattle because we didn't know the market and didn't know how long we would stay. The market has been pretty volatile. One of the condos in the building sold for $750K three years ago and is now on the market for $650K. Eight years ago they were about $400K.

[foxsquirrell]

I am not even going to bother in going into the details you are providing here about your particular case because it is not about you in particular. It is about the masses in general, how they would benefit from a system that does not allow what I call exploitation. You may call it something else, or you might list a litany of advantages the current system has. That is up to you.

[WindAtMyBack]

If you don't like it, build your own house. It's your choice. Why do you complain when they provide a service that you don't want to do yourself?

[exitseven]

This is what makes capitalism work. I know many people that own se real rental properties. They worked hard to acquire them and there is a lot of work involved in maintaining tham.

[foxsquirrell]

Exploiting people is what makes capitalism work. And you think it is right?

[exitseven]

How is renting your property to other people exploiting them? There are plenty of places to rent. Nobody is holding a gun to their heads

[foxsquirrell]

I am not talking about renting a room in your house! Did you read the detail in my question? Its about few people buying vast amounts of land and property which has an affect on the price of land and property. The effect is much higher prices and people have to pay much much more money then they would have if everyone was allowed a limited amount of property. Say one house per household. You can rent a room in your one house as much as you like. You can even rent all the rooms and you sleep on the couch if you like.

[exitseven]

If they buy large tracts of land and do not develop it it does make the price of land go up. however the land owners still hjave to pay taxes on the land and not develop it. Thy lose money.

[foxsquirrell]

But many of them do develop it. I dont think they like to buy without a plan in mind. And that plan is usually money. In addition even if they don't develop it they are still denying land to the market making the remaining available land automatically more expensive. Its simple economics really. Its unfair, There should be limits on property. No one needs more then a set amount of land/property to have a nice comfortable house. Freedom needs to be shared!!

[exitseven]

@foxsquirrell Who decides what the limits are? What about people that already own more than their share? What about corporations? Can corporations own land? Who gets to decide all this?

[foxsquirrell]

Here I am introducing the concept. If the government wants to implement it don't worry they will address all of your questions and more.

[Avicenna]

It’s not as simple as that, but the lack of housing is a big concern

[foxsquirrell]

Why it is not as simple as that? What are the alternative scenarios? To which scenario should we aim so that we gradually improve the quality of lives of millions of people?

[Avicenna]

You know, there is more than one possible approach to a problem. Incidentally, there are plenty of small landlords who aren't sucking their renters dry. Seems to me that increasing supply by making it easier to build is a better solution, since clearly demand is there.

[beefcakebradybatson]

Of course not, but that's laissez-faire capitalism, and you forgot the homeless multitudes.

[foxsquirrell]

At least you're honest to name capitalism as the force behind this hardship. I am afraid that the freedom you so hold in high esteem there in the states is but an illusion. For how can you be free, when you are working for the capitalist to line up his pockets with green dollar bills.

[noohair]

You are 40 and you think life is fair? Your parents failed you...

[foxsquirrell]

What are you talking about? I don't think that life is fair! That is precisely what I'm talking about. And I am pin pointing why it is not fair. What are you trying to tell me, that I should accept it and move on? I am curious about what people think about this. Not interested in listening to other things here.

[noohair]

Yes, don't complain about thinks that are obvious and you can’t change. Move forward.

[Pterodon]

So now you want to dictate how many properties a person can buy?

[foxsquirrell]

You got that right Mr. Very right indeed. Although you do seem to miss part of it. Its not about dictating. It is about not allowing people to exploit other people! Do YOU GET IT? OR do you not get it? Who do you think you are that you can buy as many land or property as you want. You think its only you in your country? Think what you want. I am explaining to you why I am saying these things, and if you are one of those who does not want to listen either because of stupidity, self interest, or some other reason, then we are in two opposing camps. We are enemies.

[Pterodon]

No it’s dictating

[DrPepper12]

It's a rent seeking investment. That's all

[seeyounexttuesday]

Of course it’s fair. Grow up.

[foxsquirrell]

This is a new one. I need to grow up according to this 61 year old sage! You out there remember that its ok to get robbed all your life if it is called rent or mortgage. And to accept being robbed its part of being grown up! If you complain you're a baby cry.
Unbelievable SMH.

[seeyounexttuesday]

Dummy. You don't need to get "robbed" just buy some land, all the building materials, and build your house yourself.

[foxsquirrell]

I am already thinking about that Sage. You think it had to be you to give me this idea? Why don't you explain why it is fair that so many people are being robbed, and show us how much of a sage you are?

[seeyounexttuesday]

Dingus, you aren't being "robbed" You consent and enter into a contract to purchase a home with a bank and have full knowledge of the terms of that contract when entering into it. Same when entering into a contract to lease a space in someone else's property.

[foxsquirrell]

Oh wow once again Sage thank you for letting me know about contracts I did not know about them. Really? Is that how it works? That's awesome. Such a Sage you are. Good day, take care.

[kavakava]

Yes.

[foxsquirrell]

Do you or your parents have multiple properties?

[kavakava]

My dad does.

[foxsquirrell]

Then that is why you said yes. O. k. Noted.

[kavakava]

Renters need owners
That's how it works.

[foxsquirrell]

Are those your capitalist dad's words? Do you have thoughts of your own?
Besides, what you said is false. Renters need opportunities to buy there own house. That is what they need not owners. Go on thinking like this, I know that you feel safe knowing that your dad is behind you and you don't give a damn about other people. Just pray someone like me does never come to power because I will hang you. You and your dad.

[kavakava]

Let them buy houses. You should sell them houses. When will you start selling them houses?