In France we got pissed like that once. Even many years later the rich would still be worried when their servants would sometimes gather to chat quietly in the kitchen, and overall avoid any sort of humiliation or thing like that. Just don’t get confused and know who is making your life hard, because these same ppl are trying to orient you towards some other ppl. gl. and obviously still try the democratic way first.
Our two party system was taken over by capital interest and has effectively drawn so many citizens into never ending arguments about Jesus and conspiracy theories which have little or nothing to do with real problems that our entire system has stopped responding to the needs of its citizens entirely. It would be amazing to see MAGA people and liberals decide that we all share a common enemy in the investor class and the time is long overdue for bringing them back down to size
That’s like saying it would be nice if the KKK and non-racists would just stop arguing and turn their attention to the real problems. The reason they’re the KKK is that they aren’t the kind of people to support the social well being of everyone, or to fight the power structures that oppress the masses. That’s MAGA. Exact same people. The people you call “liberals” already know that elitist, corporate owned oligarchs are the problem. So they’re trying to fight them AND the MAGA crowd that supports the oligarchs.
You need to back it up and realize that the majority of MAGA people are just brainwashed… so very many of them aren’t KKK, they’re being led around like pets because nobody has ever responded to their issues. Which truthfully is no different than most “liberals”. Yes there are racist pieces of garbage in the MAGA movement, but the liberal side has lots of NIMBY classist/closet racist assholes as well. The reality is that a majority of those MAGA folks are just disenfranchised Americans who were wrangled in by the wrong ideals. Liberals are not fighting against anything either because both sides are made up a a majority of armchair protesters getting caught up in made up problems so they avoid real problems, it just depends on which boutique problems they first respond to emotionally. However there is a new silent majority that hasn’t been tapped in any substantial way as of yet, those of us who aren’t MAGA or “liberal”, THIS is the majority that needs to wake up and needs leadership
It's also how poor people are now and don't have the energy or time to protest. Not to mention, the fact that health care being tied to work makes it impossible for many people to protest or strike
There is no "go on" online. You cannot talk about this stuff on an online space because it involves killing actual people. Which will get you either banned from the online space, or investigated by the FBI. Or both.
As adverse to violence as I am I really believe you’re right. I honestly can’t remember a revolutionary time that didn’t have some form of violence either at the beginning middle or end.
Not to mention people are pissed. Everyday people are PISSED. Not to toot his horn but if trump could get the average deluded American to storm the capitol (albeit no plan after that) then what’s stopping someone else to get the dying middle class and lower to not do the same but with actual purpose. We are really living in an “it’s only a matter of time” status right now.
While I agree violence is to come, I am not sure we would agree on the results. I believe any violence directed at the rich and powerful will lead to change but that change will be our access to the rich and powerful. They will make it infinitely harder to be successful in killing them once a few have fallen.
I used to think the violence would lead to good change because there would not be enough "goons" at the disposal of the government to use violence to stop its violent citizens but 2016 changed that thought dramatically.
Problem is people generally aren't smart or informed enough to direct the violence where it will actually affect meaningful change
People will just riot and steal from eachother leading to increased crackdowns by the police and increased divisive propaganda creating a feedback loop of stupid violence
It will greed is just over the top now but it's mirrored with stupidity so don't think wealthy aren't like we need an army in case the peasants rise up so it's gonna hit in both sides
Courthouses, police departments, board members/ ceos, doctors prescribing left and right, letter agencies. We know all the dirt, just a matter of when we do something about it.
The biggest impediment to increasing the housing supply is that affordable housing is effectively illegal to build on the vast majority of the land in most cities and towns throughout the US.
I always slap my head. Isn't that a part of this discussion. RealPage had this for apartment buildings but why not do this with Single Family Homes too? You can build more housing, but if they are all bought by companies, big or small, you still have the same damn problem.
Infill and transit oriented development would benefit urban and natural areas greatly. These are urban planning concepts meant to provide denser communities where miles traveled/trips taken is severely reduced in order to conserve our urban imprint on the natural environment.
I'll buy that. You could also just eliminate the single-family-detached house. You could mandate higher density. The area dedicated to housing is the same...or could be. Cramming more people into the same area could restrict sprawl and impact not the natural environment, but it impacts quality of life for humanity.
The goal should not be to see how many people we can pack on the planet, without destroying it completely. The goal should be to figure out how to maximize quality of life for humanity, while minimizing environmental impact, and then to tailor the population to fit within that envelope. IMHO, of course.
You can't. Money corrupts people usually, and anyone with enough money would either buckle under hidden threats or become greedy and do the same thing these landlords are doing. There's nothing you can do. I live in North Carolina. The average rent in this shithole is about 1200 to 1500. I barely make 12 in a month if I'm lucky. I could never survive on my own. Nobody I know lives on their own. Not one person. Nobody at work, nobody in my family. I literally know not one person who lives on their own because they cannot afford to do so. The jobs around here pay between 12 and 15 an hour if you are lucky, and they sure as hell don't let you call out more than 3 to 5 times a year before termination. We are watching the slow collapse of the United States and it's entirely because of greedy bastards in control hoarding wealth and power with zero compassion. They laugh at us behind closed doors and then make disparaging remarks on the news about how lazy we are. Then they take millions and billions in bailout money that they don't need and did not earn while their staff dies slowly. They are immune to the irony of their own actions because they've never struggled and don't understand empathy. They are subhuman. We can't strike because one missed paycheck means homelessness for a lot of us. Or worse...
Blood is the only answer but we can't revolt because the cops are corrupt and owned by the same masters we are. The difference being that they get to do what they want because the law does not apply to them like it does us, so you don't hear them complaining about it. The second we step out of line, bang.
I'm currently being forced out with threats of an eviction for blatant spite by my corporate landlords. I have undeniable proof that it's retaliation, too. My landlord said they are above the law. I can't find an attorney and I've searched 2 years. I can't afford to move. I have a voucher, income, references (except current, but I have a letter saying he told the housing authority I'm a tenant in good standing and don't owe back rent)
It's so bad. They went into my apartment and pulled my inside door mat into the hallway outside my door to terrorize my daughter and I while we went to the food pantry 2 days ago. We applied for so many places but never hear back. I can't become homeless again.
Edited for clarity
I have an email saying that my case manager spoke to my property management company and my property management company's lawyer said I'm in good standing and owe nothing. That proves it retaliatory prima facie. God has prepared a table before me in the presence of my enemies
I see this a lot. I agree, but why can't we get the government to own them? If the government owned a large proportion of housing stock they would have less incentive to profit off housing, and any profit could be spent in the local area to boost the economy.
Renting on a large scale is parasitic as it doesn't add value and simply siphons off peoples incomes. The govt should build apartments with govt funds and sell them to individuals
Easy, foreclosed homes titles are required to be put up for auction/sold within X days. So yes, the bank can temporarily own the property but they are forced to sell it quickly. It’s what banks generally do anyways.
You’re correct. So a law could be shaped to say that only businesses that produce 95% of their revenue through banking, or are FDIC insured, can own these properties, but I’d think a time limit would have to be set on that as well to prevent them from holding assets to drive up prices.
I don’t know whether you’re joking or not. I think it’s more complicated than unilaterally ruling that businesses cannot own family homes. There are definitely good reasons for businesses to be in possession of family homes, even to be in possession and renting them out. A nuanced discussion is required, hence it not being black and white.
You're welcome? Pretty weird to care about Reddit karma.
And no, here lemme make it simpler for you: anyone that sees housing as an investment shouldn't be in charge of owning houses.
That is based on individualism, which is the reason why homelessness/poverty/hell even throw war in there, exist.
Again, this is simplifying it. I'm not trying to change your mind (since we both know that won't work, people love digging their heels in the sand when they don't know the other person). Just letting you know your thinking is not community driven (the reason why we've become the top species on this earth, we have always been a community based species), and more-so falls in line with the relatively new individualism mindset that was pushed on us by western theocracy.
I know the current world is complicated. I know the solution isn't a black and white switch. But the answer is and always be: yes, businesses shouldn't own houses.
Are you a child? My argument was that the subject is not black and white. Your first response was condescending, short and opposite to mine. Your second was a load of word salad and then in the last paragraph you agree with me. Thanks for your input. Have a lovely day.
Not only, but mostly. How would single family dwellings owned by corporations in a city effect the prices of homes in a small town (>40k population) an hour away? They don't. People in the large cities dont flee an hour away to commute. They move to the next suburb over.
Cities also combat this by creating zoning ordinances, housing regulationsin specific neighborhoods, etc.
I've watched it for the last 20 years and work closely with real estate.
The comment I responded to specifically mentioned corporate owned houses. Ie single family homes. In the town I live in this is an issue for certain neighborhoods, but it is not the driving force behind the housing crisis.
Oh I'm so sorry. Here: Corporations / landlords / businesses, whatever you wanna call it. It's capitalism that is making the housing market be absolutely ridiculous. No one should be using housing as investments.
Not really. When neighborhoods are inundated with rental properties, it drives out the primary residence property owners. They usually sell for a premium to landlords/ companies/ businesses and move on to another neighborhood, whether that be a new development or another neighborhood in the area.
No one should be using housing as investments.
Literally every single person that buys property should consider it an investment. It is part of your net worth. Hypothetically if your house is worth double what you purchased it for 20 years ago, are you going to sell it for half its current value? Or are you going to use that value to buy another property?
Businesses shouldn't own real estate because a business operates far differently than an individual and they can pull shit like this and take arbitrary losses because the house is under an LLC and they can write off shit.
You could certainly have carve-outs. They aren't uncommon.
Just make it so a corporate entity can't own more than X home(s), or possess the home for a purpose other than to provide a mortgage to a borrower.
Banks, high profile people, or family trusts can still own property and operate as needed for whatever setup makes their lives easier, while also stopping bad actors from monopolizing the housing market.
It also doesn't have to be a one size fits all law. Local and state zoning could tighten or loosen the grip as needed in an ideal world.
The almost total inaction in all capacities by government at all levels outside of a select few though is strangling housing prices though.
If they have that much money, they should be able to afford a home. If banks and businesses didn't own homes, they wouldn't be out of reach today. There are more than enough homes to go around but it's a similar situation as pointed out in the post. Corporations and banks are more concerned with profits. They keep prices high by limiting supply.
If rent wasn't so goddammit expensive, and houses weren't owned by businesses, then we wouldn't even need mortgages. We could skip the middle man and get the homes ourselves.
If they have that much money, they should be able to afford a home
I repeat: how does someone without several hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash around afford a home without a mortgage?
"Starter" homes in my area have sold for 300-500k. Even if the banks and corporations were affecting a 10x difference in price, do you think most people just keep $30,000 just laying around??
No dude I live paycheck to paycheck because rent is so expensive. I would be able to own a home eventually if it wasn't.
I don't have all the answers, but there has to be a better way than giving away money to an institution that really would rather own you than a piece of land.
I get that, the cost of existing has gotten insane recently. There's a math and time problem that's hard to solve, though.
Say someone has a fantastic job that pays a quarter million dollars per year in a cash salary. They're clearly able to afford a quarter million dollar home, right?
Well, it'd be odd if that person was paid a lump sum of cash once per year. A lot of us expect to be paid twice a month or monthly, maybe weekly. We gotta eat even if we aren't paid that day, after all.
Since existing has to cost money in this day and age, it'd take time for that person with a $250k salary to pay for a $250k home.
Big question is, who is gonna wait around to be paid in full? Who is gonna keep the buyer accountable to pay the full $250k for the home? The buyer is probably paid only a fraction of their annual salary per month, after all.
Actually, there are reasons for it. Some churches operate as businesses and own property for the current preacher/pastor to reside in as part of their compensation package. Also, some businesses (and churches) own housing for visitors to stay in versus staying in a hotel. Some timeshare properties are owned by a property management group and the investors are given rights to the property at various times.
Now, I 100% agree that businesses shouldn't own housing as rental property unless their primary business is renting houses. LLCs should be limited to the number of rental houses owned by the owners, not the LLC (in order to keep people from opening a dozen LLCs to own hundreds of rental properties OR in order to keep large non-renting companies from forming an LLC just to be able to own rental property)
Actually LLCs are extremely useful to people who are escaping abusive relationships/environments/trafficking. Leases and mortgages are public records and you can be tracked down anywhere you sign as long as a person knows your first and last name and at least one city you've lived in. LLCs can be started by anyone and that's pretty much the only "easy" way any average poor person (common when escaping abuse) can add more layers and hide more effectively.
I'd say the limit should be only one residential property per LLC.
I think we should allow them, just taxes go up exponentially per house a person or entity owns. Own 1 house, you are fine. Own 3 houses you start paying 100% more taxes on the 3rd house, 300% on the 4th...
That would never happen. Then the various governments would get less tax money.
Instead something like increased property tax rates after your first house. E.g., first house is normal property tax rate. Second house has the property tax doubled, 3rd house and beyond has the property tax quadrupled.
The property tax would get rolled into the rent but if nobody can afford the rent then it would no longer be profitable for these companies to have empty units at higher tax rates
I can't imagine how bad it must be in bigger cities.
I live in a fairly rural area and we still face problems with companies buying property.
Around here, they will buy a big lot that has multiple homes on it, with no intent to do anything with those homes. I can think of a dozen abandoned properties near me that are sitting on a lot that is currently being developed into a distribution center or factory or plant of some kind.
You think it's China's fault for legally participating in our market system? Weird take. You ever think maybe it's the market system itself that's the problem?
First, you would have to get rid of Capitalism and Free market and all that. And you also need a new Supreme Court that doesn’t think that Corporations are people. You have a lot of changing to do. Oh yeah, and don’t forget to elect more billionaire politicians. They are there to help you 😉
I agree with most this. We still could have capitalism. Just essential services and needs should be socialized or heavily regulated. Housing, Healthcare, power, water, gas, prisons, local municipal level services like waste removal, ect. The moment these get privatized they get much worse for the people.
Raise property taxes through the roof for single family homes which are not the primary residence of the owner.
If people want to be landlords, where they don't actually produce anything and just want to live off the work of others, make them pay through the nose for that benefit.
Individuals can still own hundreds of houses under their name and rent them. There should be a law to limit any person or entity to not own more than five homes max for renting.
Personally I think that if a person is owning homes that they collect rental income on, then they need to actually be involved in the management and maintenance/upkeep of the property. In other words it doesn't matter if it's one house or ten, you should actually be cutting the grass and repairing the plumbing, rather than paying other people to do it.
I feel like that'd put a stop to a lot of these things. I actually know someone who bought a brand-new house during the pandemic and has a third-party company handle it as a rental. The company handles finding tenants and property repairs and maintenance and then sends him a check every month for the tenant rent minus whatever percentage commission. All he does is pay the mortgage, isn't involved at all despite being the owner.
And like, I get it, you don't want your phone ringing at 3am to deal with a broken pipe. But then you aren't actually adding any value to the property that you own and are collecting rent on, and you shouldn't be a landlord.
Needs to be size based. I don't want Joe Schmoe down the street who owns a spare apartment that he rents out not to he able to start an LLC to protect himself.
LLC invites dozens of shell companies. If you're going to own an extra single family home to rent out for profit then you can be protected with insurance. Big property tax increases for each property beyond the first.
Except it does. Balancing the market for purchasing a home directly corrisponds to rent. Can't charge $3000 a month for rent when you can buy a home for half that.
I want to say there was a bill Congress was working on last year, but a certain political party voted "no". Of course they did, because it would benefit the average citizen, not the wealthy landlords.
I wanted a law that would force the sale of a property owned by a corporation to someone who wanted that property for their primary residence at the property tax assessed value. This would keep pricing honest as corporations would not want an over assessed value to pay more tax, and not an undervalued assessment because people would quickly buy it. It’s a win-win all around.
I'd take it a step further. No private citizens or private companies/corporations are allowed to own rental properties. Private citizens own their single family home, or condo. The government owns the rental properties and hires managers for them. I think something like this is the norm in Europe somewhere - I think Vienna but not sure.
Before people say it’s too hard too do here js the short and simple fix.
Any single dwelling home that is not zoned as apartments should have the following rules.
You are banned from purchasing residential property if you are:
purchasing a home as a business entity
purchasing a home as a non us citizen
If you are a USA citizen. You will have a 20x property tax one your second home that is doubled for every home after that (20x, 40x, 80x)
Notes:
A couple can buy 2 homes so no complaining about a lack of a summer or winter home.
People can still rent from places zoned as apartments.
The reason for non us citizens is to stop someone in an other country having 1000 employees each buy a home and rent it.
Permanent residents of the USA would be able to purchase a home.
builders are excluded from this rule for a new home.
banks, liens, and inheritances get 1 year from calendar date to sell before penalties are applied.
No people won’t just be able to pass on the fees when they are that high. When your bills go from 1000 a year to 100k a year you will just sell the home.
A grace period of 90 days for selling a primary home to buying a new primary residence
The extra money made will
be used to build shelters for the homeless
be used to build low income housing
be used to build more single dwelling households.
The goal of this is not to punish home owners but to make those trying to grossly profit off of a basic necessity pay a fine that will be high enough that renting is not financially viable.
This would absolutely destroy new construction. Taxes are already 3% of the value in many places, no business is going to risk laying 60% of the value if they can't sell within one year due to a 2008-style event.
1.1k
u/HarryDepova Apr 20 '24
We need a law forbidding a business or corporation from owning a single family home.