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.
Even so, the government is not supposed to be the one sabotaging the business. In the initial stages of the pandemic, I did support this temporarily. But emergency measures aren't supposed to continue indefinitely and the government should be compensating the owner if this continues for such an extended period of time, as it has.
Frankly, I never supported this from Day 1.
CARES Act included rent relief. It's on the tenant to claim it and pay the landlord, and if the tenant fails to do so, bye bye.
"Pandemic" has never been, is not, will never be valid grounds for abolishing private property.
I appreciate you recognize what it is, that Gary R was participating in a business. So I ask once again, is every investment or as you've correctly pointed out, a business, deserve under whatever the circumstance to be entitled to be a profitable venture?
What mental defect is it that allows a person to conflate the natural risks of being a landlord (non-paying tenants, property damage, extended vacancies, etc,) with the unnatural risks of a tyrannical government imposing upon a landlord the responsibility of financially supporting a tenant indefinitely?
Obviously he failed to take into account that flaky tenants exist and business regulations and terms are always subject to change. Had Gary R invested in Orange Juice futures and the USDA suddenly issued regulations about the growing and harvesting of oranges that materially affected his investment there's not a person here that would be all that sympatric. "Tough luck Gary, you made a poor investment" But that doesn't seem to be in play with the blowback I'm getting. I'm simply looking at this in the cold reality of business/investing and finance while every else is getting sucked into dog whistle issues. Have at it...
When you invest in futures you are gambling on whether there will be a profit or loss. Futures are inherently high risk investments, whereas real estate has always been considered extremely low risk investments. Not a good comparison. To appropriately compare something about orange juice to this situation you would have to tell orange juice producers that they must allow “customers†to drink as much of their orange juice as they want, even if the “customers†don’t pay, while the producer must continue making the orange juice and they aren’t allowed to just say I’m not selling orange juice anymore, plus they must continue paying taxes as if they were being paid for the orange juice - nope, the only way to stop it is to declare bankruptcy or sell at a loss to a corporate orange juice producer with deep enough pockets to ride out three years of expenses without any return. I would be equally outraged.
Ultimately, this is going to lead to less mom & pop landlords and more corporation held rental property. Not only will this close up an investment avenue for average people but ultimately it is going to hurt tenants. Corporate landlords not only engage in de facto price fixing, raise rent more during a long tenancy, are more rigid on late fees and minor lease infractions, charge more fees, but they can make it impossible for a person to rent again in the future once there has been a problem if they own all the area rentals.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
I love how progressive liberals strongly feel that everybody is entitled to your wealth, that you created.
There argument does not make any sense at all since since it is solely based on an emotion.
In the Big Picture, Gary isn’t alone and after June 30th, how many rental properties will be removed off the market since the risk is now not worth the end rewards. I’m sure that the rich will buy up all those second houses people are sitting on AND convert those once multi family units into one big single family home.
IMHO, Gary is in a winning position and it will be the renters, in that area, that will suffer the most…. Especially individuals in the lower income brackets.
In the end, and for every actio , there is a reaction and often that reaction isn’t what these people want, so good luck to all the renters who will be evicted not paying any money towards their rent…. Which many were still employed during the periods of COVID.
Many of these people will have a hard time in finding another place to rent since if I owned any rental property, or had an extra room to rent out, I would take a chance on anybody…. Especially on a documented freeloader with a resent eviction order.
As for the Left’s normal emotional response to the above scenario, which would be something on the line of “Where will all these people live…. These people should have thought about this when they stopped paying full or whatever to the landlord.
Perhaps I missed where any investment was entitled and guaranteed to result in profitability. Maybe Gary R should have considered other financial instruments that offered less risk...
Lol...fast forward to more and more apartments increasing rents to cover for the increased risk, more corporate apartments that can absorb periods of no rent and you'll be crying about people getting gouged.
I'll be sure to note "tough luck" in my response.
Stuff flows downhill and there is no such thing as a free ride.
The tenant described by Crone for example is now going to carry what is essentially a crushing debt judgment for a long time with a huge black mark on their rent history.
So much speculation and excuses about free stuff people, government seizures, private property enforcement when erieguy had it right in the first six word of his most recent post. Nobody is entitled to a profit on an investment or business. Period.
So if the tenants aren't required to honor their contract, why should the landlord be required to honor theirs, that is, pay the taxes, water, sewer, electricity, etc., since they are deprived of the use of their property?
Property rights are the most fundamental rights that our country was built upon. Our founders knew this and the protection of property owners was central to the limited role of government. Once these rights are diminished we are all worse off and on the path to communism.
I am happy I was not a landlord during Covid. It's examples like this one, and other personal accounts I have heard from relatives, friends, and acquaintances that reinforce my decision to no longer participate in the rental market. At this point, I'd rather have my properties available for my family and friends to enjoy and to someday leave them to my heirs. I'm sure others have made similar decisions. The end result are less properties available for rent. The irony is that the reduction in rental supply is actually accelerating the value of the properties making them potentially more valuable than before this mess was created. Perhaps policy makers should read Malcolm Gladwell's, "The Tipping Point" for some insight on unintended consequences.
Last edited by Lincolnian; 04-17-2022 at 08:26 AM..
The government obviously wants to own these properties.
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.
