Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I don't have to go along get along. I do whatever I believe is right according to my own standards.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Landlords upset ...
- Thread starter McBell
- Start date
PureX
Veteran Member
If you say so. But when one agrees so thoroughly with their own police, it should give one pause for thought.
That is indeed high praise for public housing.
But we don't have a system wherein government
has taken over it completely.
Currently, is government conducting a free rent
program at landlords' expense. Then I'll bet liberals
will complain that these landlords don't pay their fair
share of income tax. (You know...cuz rent not received
is not taxed. No profit = no income tax. And local
governments suffer from property taxes not paid.)
Last edited:
In the case of the properties I mentioned, the government has taken it over completely. They own the property, and those who work there are city employees. So, it's certainly possible to set up something like that at the state or federal level.
Not exactly. Tens of billions of taxpayer money was set aside for rental assistance. Landlords are able to apply for such assistance (Relief for Rental Owners | Coronavirus (carcovidupdates.org)). If landlords are not getting the money that's due them, then the flaw seems to be systemic, since it's distributed using the "trickle down" method favored by capitalists. Instead of direct payments from the federal government to the landlords, the money has gone to state and local governments which have discretion as to how it's disbursed.
If it's not working out for the landlords at present, then the solution would be for conservatives and capitalists to abandon support of states' rights and the "trickle down" philosophy which have been the central tenets of their ideology.
My observation is that liberals complain much more about billionaires and corporations not paying their fair share of income tax. Liberals tend to be more sympathetic to the small businessperson, although that can vary.
True. It's an issue in some areas, and one that people are trying to address.
For instance, plenty of cities have community gardens in parks where neighbourhood residents can grow vegetables for free.
Now... ask yourself how it would go down if someone suggested offering free housing in city parks. Homeless encampments tend to get cleared out by local governments, not encouraged.
The factors are different, but I think you knew that.
Please don't pretend that switching housing providers is as easy or cheap as switching bread providers.
Some investments have carrying costs. The investor always pays for them. Sure, they do it with the hope that the revenue will offset the carrying costs over the long term, which is still a fair hope for a landlord.
Any landlord who didn't keep a reserve fund for the times when the costs exceed revenue acted foolishly. This pandemic is probably in the statistical tail of what a landlord would have prepared for, but the same is true for, say, a tenant who lost their job in March of last year and is still looking for work, or a tenant without health insurance who got bankrupted by a hospital stay for COVID-19.
If you never want your investment to have any losses, put your money in savings bonds. Anyone who expects a consistently high return that never dips is either a crook or a fool.
The pandemic feels like a long time for everyone, but it's temporary. Over a 10- or 20-year timeframe, it's a big blip, but still a bit. Nobody's suggesting a permanent moratorium on evictions. The value in your property is still there and is still rising. Your rental income is probably still mostly there and will go back to fully there soon. Don't pretend like you're on the verge of destitution; if you are, try selling off one of your buildings or finding a real job.
And that might eventually happen as Ameristan marches
in the direction of socialism. The current prohibition against
eviction for non-payment or health & safety violations is
just one step.
Tenants receiving government assistance are under no
obligation to give it to landlords. But landlords are obligated
by law to allow non-payers to remain, with all utilities &
services given for free. Government could require utilities
& lower governments to waive their fees. But that would
be political suicide. Making landlords foot the bill is popular.
Abandon states' rights?
It's the federal government that instituted the rent holiday.
Centralizing all governmental power isn't conducive to liberty.
We landlords aren't basking in any sympathy.
Liberals pay lip service to small business, but they're
also the biggest enemy, with all their ill considered
micro-regulation.
I favor allowing homeless to camp in appropriate places.
But in my ultra-liberal town, no place is ever deemed appropriate.
They have 2 choices....
1) Stay in the few very costly (to taxpayers) shelters.
2) Find some other place where they're continually
on the move cuz the city doesn't want them there.
They allow no solution in between those extremes.
I've allowed living at my storage facility, as long as
they don't attract attention. Of course, this is
illegal. Sometimes the law is wrong.
The factors are more alike than you'll admit.
Please don't pretend that short term housing is no option.
Tenants opt for longer leases voluntarily because they're
cheaper per month.
Being a landlord is a business, with the net income stream
determining the value. Operating costs.differ.from.the.carrying
costs.of.a.non-business.investment,eg,raw.land.to.be.developed.
We.have.insurance,utilities,maintenance,replacement,labor,
regulatory,&.much.higher.property.taxes.
Imagining.that.eventual.sale.is.where.the.profit.lies.is.a.liberal.
fantasy....There.would.be.no.increase.in.value.without.profit.
during.ownership,ie,the.asset.must.be.productive.
It doesn't appear that reality is sinking in,given.that.you're.
repeating.the.same.errors.
Merely owning and renting property is not a business.
There can be businesses associated with renting property (e.g. land development, landscaping, repairs) and those are sometimes done by the same entity that owns the land, but in those cases, that's the business, not merely being a landlord.
Yes: the costs, returns, and risks are different for a rental property than for vacant land.
When someone purchases a rental property, they do it knowing that it won't be always generating as much money as they might like: maybe it won't be 100% rented, and maybe the market will dictate that rents be lower than the landlord would like.
The pandemic is probably at the extreme end of risk that someone might have imagined, but I don't have special sympathy for real estate investors over and above the sympathy I have for equity investors who might have to delay their retirement for a few years while the market bounces back... or for people who can't make the mortgage on their investment property over and above the sympathy I have for people who can't make the mortgage on their home.
If by "the asset must be productive," you mean "the asset must generate positive net revenue every single month/quarter/year/etc. for its entire life," then I'd say your expectations are unreasonable.
If by "the asset must be productive," you mean "the revenue must generally generate enough net revenue over the long term to make the investment worthwhile," then I'd agree... and I'd also say that the temporary eviction moratorium doesn't change that this will still generally happen.
Really?
I hire personnel mangers, receptionists, maintenance
workers, agents, & others....I buy buildings, tools, plow
trucks, snow throwers, computers, lawn mowers, etc, etc.
And this is not a business, you say?
I'm impressed how those who know so little of a
subject will proffer their illusions with such certainty.
The danger is when such folk get into politics, &
impose their values upon others.
As much as I'd like to believe it to be true, I fear that Ameristan will never march in the direction of socialism.
As far as the current prohibition against eviction, that's a temporary condition justified by a national health crisis. Sometimes there are temporary restrictions on rights, such as during WW2 or the Civil War. Even the Cold War had some restrictions, mainly due to fear and paranoia about socialism. Ironic, eh?
Then what happened to all the money that was set aside to reimburse landlords for their losses?
But the money was sent to the state governments instead of directly to the landlords. If the landlords aren't getting it, is it the state's fault for holding it up?
As for what's conducive to liberty, it largely depend on whose liberty we're talking about, as well as their liberty to do what?
It's probably a PR problem. All the big corporations hire PR firms and advertising agencies to put out this image of 'we are wonderful people.' The dairy lobby puts out clever and funny commercials about Aaron Burr.
You might get more sympathy if you do something like that. Who wouldn't love a Scotsman in a kilt as their spokesperson?
Is that an ideological flaw of liberalism, or an organizational flaw of government and bureaucracies in general? If it's the latter, then that might explain socialism to some degree. Those of a more radical bent tend to want to cut through red tape and have little patience for bureaucratic intransigence.
It's definitely in the direction, what with the continually
increasing regulation. The question is how far it will go.
It's not justified in light of the alternative, ie,
government supports those who cannot pay.
No landlords I know are getting paid for losses.
Government does have disaster loans, but those
must be repaid (generally).
If the fed creates a policy with this effect,
& does nothing to fix any problems, what's
that tell ya.
Liberty for all, of course.
But this doesn't mean that some citizens should
get a free ride at the expense of other citizens.
Government should provide & pay for social programs,
not targeted businesses.
I'm looking for sympathy.
As I've said, I got out of the vast bulk of my residential stuff.
Liberalism is all about organizational flaws, ie, having
government assume too much responsibility & power.
And the taking from some to give to others. All this
without due consideration.
Conservatives also suffer from such a mindset, but
less so in the economic arena.
Yes.
Property maintenance is a business. Snow removal is a business. Owning property is not a business in and of itself.
Those things you say are a business are all part of being a landlord.
Where do you think the money comes from to pay for property taxes,
utilities, maintenance, management, insurance, etc? If not from rent,
then you'd say from an eventual sale's profit? Ridiculous.
Ongoing operations need ongoing money. And we need profit, without
which no business would provide housing in the first place. We're not
a charity that survives on donations.
You still don't realize that rental property appreciation is due
to income potential due to operation. Without that continuing
profit, the property has no value at all, let alone appreciation.
Is there any particular reason you keep misrepresenting me?
"No evictions for a year or two for the tenants who lost their jobs due to COVID" does not mean "no rent." It means reduced rent on a temporary basis.
We're in a pandemic. Now is not the time to be throwing people out of their homes. So this means your "business" is down on revenue? Well, you could have it worse - plenty of legitimate businesses aren't operating at all right now, and a landlord - by definition - has significant assets that they could sell off if things got really bad.
So you're demanding positive net revenue all the time? Like I said: this is the expectation of a fool or a crook.
If you're going to pretend to be a businessperson, then act like one. A reserve fund is a tool that legitimate businesses use.
Edit: legitimate businesses also understand that revenue will go up and down, and they build this fact into their business model.
Last edited:
I don't intend to.
Is there any reason you keep misrepresenting the landlord business?
I don't think you understand the eviction moratorium's requirements
& effects. A tenant need only declare they're unable to pay the rent.
In the real world, some are able, but make a false declaration.
Making it temporary, ie, for only a couple years, is still a troubling
burden for landlords (not for me, of course).
And once the moratorium is lifted, those who've not paid will typically
never pay the back rent. It's just how tenants are....get far behind, &
very very few ever make good on their debts.
Ref...
CDC extends eviction moratorium until June 30 - CNN
Let government pay their rent, instead of expecting individual
landlords to bear the entire burden of federal policy.
I'm affected very little.
No.
But dependable revenue is necessary.
You've been saying it's not...that profit should come from sales.
That is flat out ridiculous.
Imagine my opinion of guys liberals who are generous
only with someone else's money. Both fools and crooks
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
It means NO RENT tor landlords who have tenants that pay no rent, and never pay back the rent they owe the landlords. What if those landlords have a mortgage to pay, as most landlords do? One of my tenants owes me over $14,000 and has shown no good faith effort to pay me anything, so unless I get rental assistance from the county as per the some bills that have passed through congress, I will never get that money.
Some might say that you're not in a "real" business.
Providing free housing doesn't cost you anything because you
already own the building, so you don't deserve any assistance, eh.
Where's your compassion, woman!
You can't expect government to bail you out when government
decrees that you can't evict deadbeats, & must house them.
It's time you rich landlords gave back some of the ill gotten
wealth back to the common man (& common woman).
Caution...
A wee bit'o sarcasm in the above post.
We Never Know
No Slack
Fyi...
Rental Properties That Are Businesses
As you’ve probably gathered from what you’ve read above, when you own a property, it will qualify as a business if you earn profit and regularly work at the property.
Let’s say you own four apartment complexes. These complexes have several tenants and you can often be found working at the units. This can include office work such as finding new tenants, posting advertisements of empty units, or physical work such as putting in new furnishings, cleaning empty units, and looking at maintenance requests from renters.
You’ll probably like to hear that you don’t necessarily have to do all the work yourself for your property to be considered a business by the IRS. You can hire people like a property manager or maintenance employees to help you.
If you don’t have the time to manage the four apartment complexes as you have, by all means, you can hire a real estate agent or property manager to help you out. If you have someone working for you, even if you’re not at the property that often, the property can still be considered a business.
Thankfully, there isn’t a specific number of properties you have to own in order to qualify as a business. Whether you rent out one single-family home, 10 apartment complexes that are used for student housing, or you own a strip of business spaces that a store rents, you may be considered a business by the IRS.
Is A Rental Property Considered A Business? What You Need To Know - RentPrep
Edit....This was actually supposed to be posted to @9-10ths_Penguin
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I DO expect the government to bail me out, even though that tenant does not deserve to be bailed out because he was always behind on rent even before Covid, and I never even threatened to evict him. He really has no excuse, he is just taking advantage of me, but his days doing that are numbered. Nobody can believe how much money he owes me, it's ridiculous.
As I touched on before: leveraging - investing with borrowed money - is risky business.
If someone really wants to invest in real estate but they don't have enough cash for a whole building, they can buy shares in a REIT or the like.
If the return from a REIT isn't enough for their liking and they decide to borrow to invest, well, they realized - or ought to have realized - that they were magnifying their risk.
If you gamble, then you accept the possibility that your gamble might lose.
Edit: and as I touched on earlier, every landlord has an asset they can sell if things get really bad.