Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Which means he has a mortgage and is paying interest. The risk is all his. You need good credit to buy without a down payment and you still pay a higher interest rate for doing so. He could lose his shirt if the market tumbles again or he has rental units sitting empty for some reason or tenants damage the property or...or...or...
Do you even realize that if someone stops paying their rent today, it will take him a year to evict them? A year during which it's in his best interest to keep the heat on during the winter so the pipes don't freeze? And quite oftheen when people are evicted they trash the place before they leave because they're mad at being kicked out. If one renter does this, he goes a year without collecting rent, has to pay the heating bill and then has to repair the unit before he can rent it again. There goes his "money tree". He can attempt to sue and will win in court but winning and collecting are two different things.
??? He initially lived in this house as a renter; he bought it with seller financing. Then he got a high-paying job. The house is now paid off and the rent checks are largely gravy.
Are you saying the floor sweeper is not human and doesnt deserve a better life?
No, I am saying that he is paid based upon what he delivers to the business. But I think you knew this already.
The question is: What does he do to earn a better living?
What talent/skill does he bring to the table to make him worthy of more pay?
As a Line mechanic I progressed from floor sweeper to operator, to mechanic to expert mechanic because I wanted more pay. In other words, I made myself more valuable to the company and earned higher pay.
It is not my problem or my concern if some people choose to apply themselves at a lower level. Entry level jobs tend to pay entry level wages because anyone or everyone can do these simple tasks that require very little skill and have very little responsibility. Jobs generally pay a person what they are worth. A burger flipper at Burger King can be trained in a few hours. The bagger person in the super market can be trained in a few hours. The Butcher may need months or more to train. Are you saying that someone who has applied themselves and put far more effort into becoming skilled doesn't deserve to be paid a lot more than someone with minimal skill?
There are people I work with who make less than half of what I do. They also aren't responsible for a production line, in charge of 20+ people, can't make running adjustments and in fact have no skill that can't be replaced by someone else after a few hours of training. That is what makes them low paid.
Nope, I've been a stay at home mom for quite a number of years. My husband's pay and benefits from the union afforded me to do this.
Let me guess... your husband is also expecting a union pension. I hope you realize that union pensions absolutely depend on corporate profits (union pension systems hold trillions of dollars worth of investments) to be able to pay union retirees their defined pension benefits.
It's not the Congress' fault. It's the fault of the clueless people.
Congress passed the Income Tax Act and which effectively make all of the "citizens" liable for government debt, in effect turning everyone into indentured servants of the Banks. (The human collateral necessary to secure the "benefit" of the private Central Bank created by the Federal Reserve Act.)
Which means he has a mortgage and is paying interest. The risk is all his. You need good credit to buy without a down payment and you still pay a higher interest rate for doing so. He could lose his shirt if the market tumbles again or he has rental units sitting empty for some reason or tenants damage the property or...or...or...
Do you even realize that if someone stops paying their rent today, it will take him a year to evict them? A year during which it's in his best interest to keep the heat on during the winter so the pipes don't freeze? And quite often when people are evicted they trash the place before they leave because they're mad at being kicked out. If one renter does this, he goes a year without collecting rent, still has to pay the mortgage and the the electric and heating bill (and likely the water if there are children present) and then has to repair the unit before he can rent it again. There goes his "money tree". He can attempt to sue and will win in court but winning and collecting are two different things.
He is taking all the risk. That money tree could turn into a money pit over night.
For the past 15 years he has rented the house to a buddy who does all the day-to-day maintenance and management - the rent is NEVER late and everything is pretty much turnkey for the owner. (The buddy sends a rent check to the owner and then lives in the house for free by renting out the extra bedrooms). The owner DID personally re-roof the house a few years ago (saved a tidy sum by doing it himself) but otherwise this house does not require any significant outlay of time or money. The buddy does the management including evictions, so it anyone stops paying rent, the owner is not affected.
Location: Just transplanted to FL from the N GA mountains
3,997 posts, read 4,141,865 times
Reputation: 2677
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt
For the past 15 years he has rented the house to a buddy who does all the day-to-day maintenance and management - the rent is NEVER late and everything is pretty much turnkey for the owner. (The buddy sends a rent check to the owner and then lives in the house for free by renting out the extra bedrooms). The owner DID personally re-roof the house a few years ago (saved a tidy sum by doing it himself) but otherwise this house does not require any significant outlay of time or money. The buddy does the management including evictions, so it anyone stops paying rent, the owner is not affected.
So the landlord is bartering services. Work for room. Nothing wrong with that. And bartering for services is covered under the tax laws.
??? He initially lived in this house as a renter; he bought it with seller financing. Then he got a high-paying job. The house is now paid off and the rent checks are largely gravy.
So what? He's still the one taking the risk. He could have a renter like the one I described above who destroys the property. So far, your landlord sounds lucky. I hope it stays that way for him. It sounds like your landlord made some right moves. You need to get over your jealousy and make some right moves for yourself. His success has nothing to do with your success. He owns his and he owns the risks just as you own yours and you will own the risks.
??? He initially lived in this house as a renter; he bought it with seller financing. Then he got a high-paying job. The house is now paid off and the rent checks are largely gravy.
bet the rent checks are largely property taxes
but you keep up your crying
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
