Is raising rent $400 after one year excessive? (Glendale: lease, insurance)

[quixotic59]

Originally Posted by disgruntled la native

The big one would really screw over landlords, especially slumlords. Might be good for our economy in the long run. Right now landlords are absolutely greedy and horrible. Need a law to freeze all rents.

The key word here is GREEDY. Some are and some are not. Freezing rents, however, is a bit of an extreme response.

Originally Posted by Hwnwbrwncw

Are you out of your mind?

So why would landlords do any maintenance on a property? There certainly wouldn't be any new construction of apartments if rents are frozen. If you think this would actually help renters' situations you are sorely mistaken.

You should write a letter to Bernie and see if he can give everyone free rent.

You do maintenance to protect your investment, not to generate profit. That is where some landlords have lost their way. Housing is not like other commodities, it is a necessity.

Of course, you are referring to the "free market", code for "screw everyone, I'm squeezing every last penny out of you at any cost". Unlike luxury purchases, if you sell "housing services" you should be part of the social contract. If your property is indeed a "luxury" property, then charge "luxury" rents. If you offer, for lack of a better term, "middle class" housing then you should charge middle class rents. And if you are an unprincipled slum lord, you should charge "slum lord" rents.

THAT is the market at work. Kind of like charging ridiculous prices for life saving drugs. If you take advantage of a situation to maximize your profit than society should take advantage of you and tax your a$$ off. THAT is the real "free market". Instead, many like to play the "I can take advantage of you, but I'll cry THE CONSTITUTION and SOCIALISM if you try and take advantage of me.

Originally Posted by ryanms3030

Well you can't really do much new construction around LA. You'd have to knock something down and rebuild

But I get the sentiment which is why we're ready to leave. It's like the idiot that worked for Yelp calling out the CEO on the Internet because she can't afford to live in San Francisco. It's nobody's God given right to live in SF or LA or NYC. If you can't afford it, move somewhere that you can afford

So things will be knocked down and rebuilt. It happens everywhere. Not so nice if it's the property next to yours. And, no, God did not give anyone the right to live anywhere. But, if your industry is experiencing a temporary "bubble" and thereby artificially inflating real estate values, but your salaries are not keeping pace, WE (society) have the right to call foul and ask nicely that you help balance the situation. Before we tax your greedy a$$ into oblivion.

Here in America, we like to artificially manipulate markets and ignore the social contract, then act all innocent and indignant if we happen to be the ones doing the dirty deed. The truth is if the "markets" were truly "free" (of lobbyists, special interests, influence peddling, insider trading and dark money) many of the income inequity would disappear and numerous financial issues would not exist.

THE CONSTITUTION, SECOND AMENDMENT, FREE MARKETS, COMMUNISM, IMMIGRATION, UNIONS...

There I said it before you did!

[quixotic59]

Originally Posted by disgruntled la native

Most units are rent controlled to some degree. But the ones that aren't, the maximum is some absurd number, like 20-30%. Nothing is under market anymore, unless you have some naive old person.

In LA, the top 2%, even many of the top 1%, have to rent.

Housing projects turned out okay.

I actually am generally on landlord's sides, but things have gone too far in the other direction.

Sounds about right.

[disgruntled la native]

Originally Posted by Hwnwbrwncw

Response in blue.

Yeah, obviously I know you can raise rent whatever you want with 60 days notice and non rent stabilized. I never said not.

Yes, most people who make 300k a year rent now.

I'm very pro business and pro landlord, but landlords have gotten too rich. Most don't even do basic maintenance, which as the other poster said, is about protecting an investment.

[Hwnwbrwncw]

Originally Posted by disgruntled la native

Yeah, obviously I know you can raise rent whatever you want with 60 days notice and non rent stabilized. I never said not.
See below in Red.
Yes, most people who make 300k a year rent now.
According to who? La City is something like 45% home owners. Are you trying to imply that the top 2% don't own and it's really the bottom 45% of incomes that are home owners? Makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

I'm very pro business and pro landlord, but landlords have gotten too rich. Most don't even do basic maintenance, which as the other poster said, is about protecting an investment. Don't know what to say. I've never lived in a crap slumlord apartment and I've paid rents between 1200-1950/mo.What can I say, I rent apartments where it is evidence there is pride of ownership and management is involved in properly maintaining the property. It's quite evident if this is the case.

Originally Posted by disgruntled la native

Most units are rent controlled to some degree. But the ones that aren't, the maximum is some absurd number, like 20-30%. Nothing is under market anymore, unless you have some naive old person.

In LA, the top 2%, even many of the top 1%, have to rent.

Housing projects turned out okay.

I actually am generally on landlord's sides, but things have gone too far in the other direction.

Response above.

[jw2]

Originally Posted by disgruntled la native

A lot of landlords are slumlords who don't do any maintenance, yet keep raising rents the maximum.

All the new construction (minus the couple of mandatory affordable housing units) are only affordable to the top 2% anyway.

Landlords are greedy pigs that should be punished and stripped of their ability to screw over everyday people. That's why we have so many homeless.

I won't argue that there aren't slumlords but I think you will find they are mostly in rent control areas. In free market areas, landlords offer a product and if tenants don't think they are getting a fair product for the price, they don't rent from them.

[Hwnwbrwncw]

Originally Posted by jw2

I won't argue that there aren't slumlords but I think you will find they are mostly in rent control areas. In free market areas, landlords offer a product and if tenants don't think they are getting a fair product for the price, they don't rent from them.

Bingo.

[quixotic59]

Originally Posted by jw2

I won't argue that there aren't slumlords but I think you will find they are mostly in rent control areas. In free market areas, landlords offer a product and if tenants don't think they are getting a fair product for the price, they don't rent from them.

Like unicorns, the 'free market' doesn't exist

Why Free-market Economics Is a Fraud

Robert Reich (The Myth of the "Free Market" and How to Make the...)

Free market does not exist | Guardian Weekly | guardian.co.uk

I'm sorry, you were saying...........

[jw2]

Originally Posted by quixotic59

Like unicorns, the 'free market' doesn't exist

Why Free-market Economics Is a Fraud

Robert Reich (The Myth of the "Free Market" and How to Make the...)

Free market does not exist | Guardian Weekly | guardian.co.uk

I'm sorry, you were saying...........

I think you are misunderstanding the scale of examples. My example was clearly a landlord offering a product (a rental unit) for a price and if a prospective tenant did not think it was fair, s/he is free to not rent there. I can't force a tenant to overpay what they think is fair just as much as the tenant can't force me to take less what I think is fair. Somewhere between those is the market price.

Your links suggest competition comes in and buys all the rental units, creates monopolies,and sets prices. Or lobbyists influence governments to set favorable conditions to some. Or what a free society can and can't sell. I am not suggesting anything like that, my example was just a simple product and I have had no conflicts like those stated in the links you provided.

Where the slumlord comes into play is when the landlord is forced to take less than market rent. He no longer has incentive to keep the tenant there, the tenant is already incentivized by paying less than market rent, so many landlords don't feel they have to do any more. This is a market conflict and one of which I will not participate.

[WizardOfRadical]

Time to look for a new place bro

[Hwnwbrwncw]

Originally Posted by jw2

I think you are misunderstanding the scale of examples. My example was clearly a landlord offering a product (a rental unit) for a price and if a prospective tenant did not think it was fair, s/he is free to not rent there. I can't force a tenant to overpay what they think is fair just as much as the tenant can't force me to take less what I think is fair. Somewhere between those is the market price.

Your links suggest competition comes in and buys all the rental units, creates monopolies,and sets prices. Or lobbyists influence governments to set favorable conditions to some. Or what a free society can and can't sell. I am not suggesting anything like that, my example was just a simple product and I have had no conflicts like those stated in the links you provided.

Where the slumlord comes into play is when the landlord is forced to take less than market rent. He no longer has incentive to keep the tenant there, the tenant is already incentivized by paying less than market rent, so many landlords don't feel they have to do any more. This is a market conflict and one of which I will not participate.

Right on again!