• IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Because they don’t see you as a person … they see you as either a benefit or detriment to their wealth. You are an extension of their wealth and their only interest is in watching to see if that wealth increases or decreases.

    • non_expert@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think my landlord sees us as people, he’s just fundamentally incapable of understanding what it means to live in a lower income bracket. He’s selling the house we live in and seemed genuinely confused why we, as a single earner household paying significantly below market rent, would be worried because “there’s only a few situations where they can kick you out”. Yes and if they invoke one, which they will because we’re a bad investment, we’re SCREWED.

      Meanwhile he thinks he’s being generous by listing for below appraisal when it’s still at least double what he paid a couple years ago. Just living on a totally different planet.

      • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        All of this is starting to remind of Charles Dickens from 150 years ago.

        He probably thought we’d be way past his generation by now … we are in many ways but in some ways we are no different than our ancestors 10,000 years ago … this may be the 21st century but human greed and the ignorance of man never changes

    • agent_flounder@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean yeah if they’re assholes sure. And many (most?) are no doubt. Yet I have friends who are landlords and they’re not fucking monsters or I wouldn’t be friends with them.

      I think this reductive take of yours feels good to type but if we want to address the problems of housing, I think a more nuanced understanding is needed.

      If you’re like a friend of mine, it’s just a family that owns a couple extra houses (withholding judgment on that) and let’s say the husband is out of work the wife makes like $50k/yr, and you’re on the hook for two mortgages (say $5000) and now the sewer pipe to the sewer main needs replacing at a cost of $15,000, your car breaks and needs $1000 of repairs.

      If it comes to it and you don’t have the cash or credit to deal with it, nobody is going to prioritize the tenant’s sewer over their kids having a house to live in and food to eat. When times are so desperate you have to choose, you’re choosing your own family. (The assholes always choose themselves under all circumstances of course)

      Idk wtf the answer is but housing is a human right and the idea that anyone should be unsheltered is fucked.

      Both friends bought another house and rented their original. Some inherit a house. Because putting your money in savings like we used to in the 70s and 80s when you got rock solid perfectly safe 2-5% return hasn’t been a thing for 20+ years.

      Then you have corporations with the capital to be able to snap up houses after the 2008 predatory lending fiasco (thanks to unregulated capitalism). With low interest rates that ended up being the best play and then that ended up pricing out regular people.

      Yeah we need more supply but the equation there doesn’t really favor building affordable housing because reasons I don’t understand well enough to try to talk to. Some claim too much regulation but that claim is usually the kind of bullshit that corpos/rich and their shills spout to be able to deregulate and better screw us peons. So I’m skeptical.

      Idk what the solution is because I don’t understand the very complex problem well enough. But I know that “landlords eat babies” isn’t that helpful because the whole housing thing (rental, ownership) is a train wreck systemically.

      • Wade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you can’t afford to maintain a house you are renting out then you shouldn’t be a landlord. Your friends could just as easily sell the house to a family and invest in a way that doesn’t require them to maintain an asset they cannot afford, but instead they choose to keep it and profit as much as they can. Landlords are assholes.

        • KirbyProton
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          This view kinda confuses me, I’m not a landlord don’t worry! If people can’t afford a house then what are they expected to do? It’s all well and good saying if you can’t afford the repairs then you shouldn’t be a landlord but if you can’t afford a house, what then, does the same sentiment apply?

          It seems to me it’s very much a problem with the ‘system’ . Aiming your hate at landlords in general makes no sense when they aren’t the reason you don’t own a house in the first place. Obviously some people do take advantage of others, that’s not what I mean.

          What is the solution here?

          If I could wave a magic wand, I’d limit the number of houses people could own and how much wealth any 1 person could have…

          But the problem still stands, people need enough money to get a house in the first place… So how does that work?

          • aesthelete@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Aiming your hate at landlords in general makes no sense when they aren’t the reason you don’t own a house in the first place.

            They are, in some cases, the reason people don’t own houses. Not in every case of course, but certainly in some. I think there have even been “rent-to-own” scams by some landlords.

            I honestly don’t know what the landscape would look like without landlords, but that’s not a prerequisite to hating on and moaning about greedy landlords and their greedy ways.

            • Smk@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              Landlords were not a problem 30 years ago and suddenly, they are. The problem is not landlord. Removing landlords won’t magically fix everything for you. This view is radical and unproductive. This will lead the community no where near a real solution to this crisis.

              • aesthelete@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Removing landlords won’t magically fix everything for you.

                Funny that, because I bought a condo and removed landlords from my life and it did actually fix everything for me.

                The problem isn’t just the landlords, it’s a regulatory and policy environment that has shifted since Reagan toward the well off at the expense of everyone else in just about every facet of life including housing. People are pissed at this point because it’s completely unaffordable to live while some of you (I’m going to assume you’re a landlord because of your tone) are hording tons of houses to profit off of.

    • Smk@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      If that’s what you think, your life must suck ass. Landlord wants to pay their expense and that’s it. If a tenants destroys the place or ask stupid shit all the time, that sucks. That’s just being normal human being. Stop dehumanizing people.