Comment by booty [he/him]@hexbear.net on Landlords should have to pay income tax on their rental properties regardless of whether they're rented out or not.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.crimedad.work/post/12162

Why? Because apparently they need some more incentive to keep units occupied. Also, even though a property might be vacant, there’s still imputed rental income there. Its owner is just receiving it in the form of enjoying the unit for himself instead of receiving an actual rent check from a tenant. That imputed rent ought to be taxed like any other income.

Landlords should not exist in the first place. When fantasizing, why aim for mediocrity?

When fantasizing, why aim for mediocrity?

Mediocrity is as ambitious as liberals can be

I’m Mike Ehrmantraut and I approve this message.

landlords don’t build housing

They pay for it to be built. Unless you think the workers should work for free and not receive any benefit from their labor. Does hexbear know you feel this way? 🤣

Landlords don’t pay for buildings to get built, the renters ultimately do. Landlords are just middlemen.

Landlords pay up front (directly or via a loan, which the renters presumably cannot get) and assume the risk of vacancies and repairs. If landlords ceased to exist, how do you propose new housing stock be created? Should the government be your landlord?

Landlords pay up front (directly or via a loan, which the renters presumably cannot get) and assume the risk of vacancies and repairs.

And then they get bailed out by the government when their risk blows up.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/landlords-were-never-meant-to-get-bailout-funds-many-got-it-anyway-11590494400

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/blog/four-reasons-landlords-should-take-advantage-federal-rental-assistance/

And they have little to no risk in the first place because the market has such high demand that they can pretty much instantly fill vacancies, and they barely do repairs if at all. And at least where I live, renters are required to have/pay for renters insurance which further drives down the landlord’s risk. And on top of all that, they have security deposits to lower their risk even further. They don’t take on any meaningful risk.

If landlords ceased to exist, how do you propose new housing stock be created? Should the government be your landlord?

Government investment into housing development (which then turn into market rate housing/co-ops), zoning fixes, and a LVT is the solution. The builders get paid, home ownership becomes affordable, the risks are dealt with, and renters aren’t being priced gouged. It would also do wonders to help fix the homelessness crisis.

And none of it needs the government to own your home.

Landlords pay up front (directly or via a loan

You’re describing a developer. Most landlords aren’t developers.

And yes, the government should take on the role of developing residential properties and ensuring everyone has access to them. Housing is not a commodity, it’s a basic human need.

Oh the risk! Well sure that entitles them to take money from people who actually work. Go find a landlord and

of course they do. we actually understand that production doesn’t require middle men. we’re communists, fool.

wait till you understand what ‘tax’ is

Oh, so you just want the state to be your landlord? Enjoy your cinderblock gulag.

As someone who has been homeless, I would MUCH rather live my entire life in a “cinderblock gulag” then spend even a second homeless. So, yes, if we ever were to get such buildings provided to us from the government, I would greatly enjoy them.

If you own property the state is already your landlord.

sis, I would love living in a small apartment complex where everything is either five minutes away or easily accessed by public transportation

I would love being in an environment that promotes a collective spirit where people spend more time outside than inside

I would love having housing be 4% AT MOST of my monthly paycheck

but we gotta have idiots with trillions because they deserve to hang us out to dry, is that it?

No they usually don’t pay for anything to be built. Even if they did, they just pay for it with other peoples labor (their renters)

Because you don’t seem to be connecting the points together. Lead a horse to water but can’t force it to drink kinda situation.

Landlords didn’t do anything but have capital. Workers built the damn thing.

That’s the water I was talking about.

Housing can get built without the professional middlemen involved, believe it or not.

People, collectively.

Ideally all the shitheads obsessed with “owning” get removed from the equation

Communism brought Russia from a feudal industrial backwater to putting the first people in space in the span like 20-30 years, and they crushed the Nazi war machine in the process.

Go and have a look at Russia to see how how this communist/socialist mindset worked out for them.

With an 89% home ownership rate? Yeah, damn, it would really suck for 9/10 people to live in a home that they own.

Almost all the top countries on that list are socialist or were socialist until the 90s. It’s almost as if socialism actually results in homes being treated as basic needs for people instead of commodities for landlords to make money off of.

NPC talk. Youre just spouting lines

Let me guess, it was also Venezuela’s fault too?

People like you are all NPCs.

got something wrong with pronouns?

what’s wrong with you

Heres one of the largest housing developments in new york: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-op_City,_Bronx

Let’s start with pretty much the entirety of millenials and gen z that would love to own a home.

I mean, then there’s the homeless.

Not landlords, because we’re imagining a different society than the single model in your aphantasia afflicted head, believe it or not

The people living in them usually.

Landlords do not build houses, they just rent them out. Housing, shelter call it whatever you like is human right and essential need, so it should not be a part of speculations for profits. Now you can see overpriced real estate because of investors who buy it and never live there. All this “helpers” who rent out their apartments bring more harm than benefit for society (they at least contribute to a price growth in real estate). Buildings could be constructed by government owned organizations in order to provide society with housing, no need in speculators to solve problems.

Ok, so you want the government to be the landlord as you have more trust in a government monopoly than in a market.

Yup. Basically. Although it is worth noting that the type of government we currently have, beholden to capital, is not trustworthy. Their priorities first and foremost are to serving corporate interests, which is probably why you trust them so little. Any power or public capital they are entrusted with gets pumped into private companies whose sole purpose is to make as much profit as possible for as little expenditure.

Any government brave enough to outlaw private landlords is going to have much more socially oriented priorities and will be much more inclined to serve the public good rather than the almighty market.

depends on problem you are going to solve, if you want to provide people with affordable housing, then challenge your beliefs in almighty market.

Fair.

If we, the workers, are the ones running that government monopoly and not an oligopoly of landlords and other speculators then yes, that would be more fair. It’s also a vastly more efficient way to guarantee that everyone is housed, as history shows

Hmm yes, when I want a house built I call up a landlord, this is very logical behavior

70% of housing stock in the UK was built by the government in the 1970s

The same crews who do now 🤨

I never saw a landlord or developer do any work to prepare an area or build anything on any of the jobsites I was on.

Learn about budgeting, saving, getting out of debt, credit, investing, and retirement planning. Join our community, read the PF Wiki, and get on top of your finances!

Note: This community is not region centric, so if you are posting anything specific to a certain region, kindly specify that in the title (something like [USA], [EU], [AUS] etc.)

Landlords should have to pay income tax on their rental properties regardless of whether they're rented out or not.(gothamist.com)

Personal Finance

!personalfinance@lemmy.ml

Community stats

Community moderators