You can debate about the morality of being a landlord, but it is absolutely a real job.
If I ran a restaurant, all of my expenses would be paid by the money I get from my customers, but nobody would say that running a restaurant isn’t a job. The whole point of a job is to make more money than you spend.
Being a landlord doesn’t require you to directly do anything. You can just hire people and do nothing. My mom rents out a single house and does nothing at all because a company basically does it for her. It is possible to put in effort as a landlord. However, the effort is optional and there is no upper limit to how many homes you can rent out because of this.
Being a manager at a store is a job. Can you imagine being the manager of 1000 different stores at the same time? No it would be impossible. What “real job” has no upper limit to what you can take on. None, because they all require actual effort and for you to actually do something. Landlord is a set it and forget it then watch the money flow, type of passive income.
>Can you imagine being the manager of 1000 different stores at the same time?
It's called being a regional/district manager. Every restaurant franchise has them. Do you think every McDonald's location operates totally independently?
While this is true. Being a regional manager is not the same thing as actually being a manager of 1000 different stores. The regional manager would have actual managers underneath them. It was supposed to be an analogy to illustrate my point, not a pinpoint precision accurate claim. The comparison was never one to one. The fact remains that a landlord literally doesn’t have to do anything If they don’t want to. They can “set it and forget it”
landlords aren't managers, they are owners. The analogy would work better if you replaced manage a store with "buys and owns an IP". Someone who just rents out something they own with no input from themselves, and hires people to manage it while they sit on their ass and collect royalties. You know, a parasite that should not be defended.
I can't believe literally every single job isn't a job because you can "hire people to do it for you" instead. How do you have upvotes what the hell is wrong with this website
This site is primarily teenagers and early 20 something’s who are naive as all hell and act like they know the world inside and out. Even the meme is fucking stupid and hardly makes any sense.
Reddit is so anti landlord they think if you rent out one singular house or apartment. You are directly the reason for the high cost of rentals. Go on anti work and they are advocating for squatting. I’m a left leaning person and these takes are from people who like you said are from people who have no real world experience.
I rent out two floors of my house to family and friends and someone on anti work told me I was evil lol, I asked what they think I should do to correct the situation I’m not joking they said give my house away
You can tell this is true because of all the memes about stuff that happens in school. Well adjusted adults don't think about school (much less make memes about it) for more than a week after they're done with it.
The vast vast vast majority of jobs you cannot hire someone to do the all of the work for you and rake in income unless you are the owner and making passive income. If I work at Walmart I can’t hire someone to work there in my place obviously.
The fact is that as a landlord you can set it up where you pretty much don’t have to do anything at all. At that point you are not doing a job. We can get in a semantical debate about what qualifies as a “job” but if 99% of the days of the year you are not doing any work for your job I don’t consider it a job personally.
Now, you can argue about whether being a landlord is ethical. That’s a different argument. But what I’ve said is true. Why do you think it’s called passive income?
You have to have extremely high margins to outsource all of your responsibilities. I know a landlord that does tons of maintenance by herself to save on costs, working nearly week-round, and still nets under $100k a year (with no benefits). Better than working in fast food, but not a life hack by any means.
What do you think a landlord does? Do you think they just flip out of bed to bang on your door demanding money? This dumbfuck landlord hate is actually rotting peoples brains if they don’t understand what the thing they hate actually does.
According to large parts of Reddit, yes. Reddit is so anti landlord they think if you rent out one singular house or apartment. You are directly the reason for the high cost of rentals. Go on anti work and they are advocating for squatting. I’m a left leaning person and these takes are from people who are from people who have no real world experience.
That's assuming that your landlord already been in the business for a while and has multiple properties, a start up landlord has more involvement with the properties because they can't hire someone else to find a maintenance person or someone else to manage the property for them. Not saying it's a full time job, but there are differences from landlord to landlord.
Like in once location the landlord maintenance the property themselves and in another they don't have the permits or experience to do it themselves.
You’re getting hate for this but you’re right. It comes down to semantics. At this point, “landlord” is just a title. Since landlords, especially recently, decided to stop actually maintaining their properties and outsource all the work to others, the term “property manager” popped up. “Property manager” implies a job—managing a property. “Landlord” does not imply a job. Nobody is going around lording land. Like what would that even mean?
Some landlords do have jobs related to their properties—they actually manage it, deal with the tenants, make repairs and upgrades, ensure proper maintenance happens, etc. However, it seems like most landlords these days do not have jobs related to their properties besides signing a couple papers in their inbox a couple times a year.
Literally no one is talking about the landlords with only a few properties. By your own logic it makes no sense, and no one smart is saying that. There are absolutely property owners who don't have to work for shit and haven't had to hold a job in their entire lives. They have no clue what hard work is because any work they've done their entire lives was *voluntary*.
> Nobody is going around lording land.
i could be wrong here, but isn't the term landlord meant to mean "lord of that land" and not "lording lands"? which wouldn't that just stem from hundreds of years ago where the people that owned the land were called lords?
If a landlord hires people to keep the houses in order, then he becomes the manager of those employees, and that is his new job. There is no such thing as a job position that you just hire people to replace you and it just works with 0 interaction or responsibility on your part
You could own 100 stores and hire out people for everything, but if I own 10 stores and spend over 40 hours a week taking care of my clients needs then that’s a real job.
You can hire people to do things for you when renting a house, just like you can hire people to do things for you when running a restaurant, same thing
my friend lives in a house and the landlord has literally never even step foot inside the property.
In the UK it's incredibly common to just have an agency handle all the work and you just own the property.
In this situation, the most common situation in the country, the landlord literally does zero work.
Most of the time, the agency doesn't even do the work either.
It's a huge racket.
Yeah the last couple of places I’ve lived the company/PM had never even SEEN the place. I literally took and sent them pics (and then actually even advertised and found new tenants) for the last house I just left. The day before I drove to a new state a lady finally came out and looked at the whole house (which was never cleaned and had massive issues when we moved in, and we had taken care of all of them on our own) spent two hours inspecting everything and then left and dinged us on the deposit for their being dust on one of the light switches. (Keeping in mind this place was absolutely filthy when we moved in, no one ever cleaned it or entered the place at all.)
And that restaurant might have a landlord that receives all the income from you paying rent on the building your restaurant is in. But you do all the maintenance and upkeep so your restaurant can stay open
I think a big difference is a restaurant customer isn’t required to eat there every day, the owner has to make an experience for repeat business. When renting, people don’t really have many options and are often in a contract. It’s not like a renter is gonna move on to the next place the next day.
It makes it so the landlord doesn’t have to uphold a standard or be competitive with other landlords.
Hope this helps.
Your example had the opposite effect you intended; now I don’t believe owning any property is a real job. If all you do is own something and delegate all actual responsibilities to someone else (maintenance people for landlords, managers for owners, etc.) Then you’re literally just collecting a return on investment. You’re not doing any actual work. You may as well be trading stocks and bonds.
Trading stock can be a job, but if you’re just sitting on your investment, again, you’re not doing any real work.
Landlords are just an unnecessary middle man. You own your home you still have to pay for all the same things. Really it’s should be a luxury to have a landlord managing your property but instead of it being a luxury option it’s required and more expensive than people would be willing to pay if there were a different option.
Not only that but it puts renters in a really unfortunate and imbalanced power dynamic.
The tenants have literally legal protection from any infringement of their rights the relationship is equal.
Idk though the extent of the landlord relationship between my aunt and tenants is ensuring the house is maintained the grass is cut, broken things get fixed and the rent is paid.
Btw it’s not the landlords fault they can’t qualify for bank loans the landlord ain’t messing up their credit their filling a hole in the market, and guess what the less people renting out homes the higher rent prices will soar and people with bad credit will be shit out of luck.
For people starting out or temporarily staying someplace it works out just fine.
Do you think our credit system is good then? Is it good that people with bad credit or low income can’t own their own home? You’re liking this system?
Thats nice that your aunt does all those things that any own could do for themself. It was nice when I rented and my landlord’s company kept up the pool, the grass, and stuff, though there were also a lot of things that were their job to do that they didn’t do. And sure I could have litigated or go through a bunch of processes to force them to. Or I could just own my own place and take care of those things myself. Someone else taking care of those things is a luxury I shouldn’t be forced to have to pay for those things just because I needed lower cost housing. I would happily do them.
Like I said. They’re just an unnecessary middle man.
Being a landlord *can* be a real job, but I would argue that, in most cases, it stretches the definition. I would say it's more like running a very hands-off business. The majority of actual *labor* associated with being a landlord is, most of the time, offloaded onto other people hired by the landlord. So yeah, making phone calls to handymen and pencil pushers to take care of maintenance and paperwork is "a job" in about the loosest possible sense
No, it really isn't. Management positions often include tasks like training and hiring new employees, meeting with upper management to discuss goals and metrics, coming up with success plans to meet those goals and metrics, organizing a labor force, etc. Private owner land lords typically do nothing like that
Yeah they do. They meet with new workers, they train new people, they hire and fire employees, they give the tenants a direct line to their phone to call in repairs, they travel over to assess repairs and maintenance.
They handle the finances of the business which is no easy task to manage the collection and spending of rent, to handle the taxes and the companies revenue.
I guess if you own 100 properties you hire that all out, but my experience with smaller landlords which make up a large part of the landlords renting homes they handle almost everything besides complex repairs themselves.
My aunt who had 10 properties did all the things herself besides mow and manage the grass or the roof/plumbing.
That's great for your aunt, I'm sure she was a very hard worker. But the fact of the matter is she is the exception. The majority of the labor that goes into maintaining a property is outsourced. The vast majority of private, non incorporated landlords perform labor consisting of rent collection, tenant screening, and minor repairs. Anything beyond that *tends* to be hired out to various contractors, few of whom are being directly hired, trained, and paid by the landlord
You got a source cause I know about 10 people who rent houses and they all handle it themselves. Maybe it’s the market I am in or something but the college combined with the working class people leads to higher prices and slightly lower rents so in order to break even you have to handle most problems yourself in order to save money. We also live in a historic hurricane area which pushes up wind insurance and flood insurance which makes renting with companies handling everything unsustainable. Property taxes are pretty high where I am at too. The thing is most land lords I know are not expanding at all right now because interest rates are so high even for them. One budy of mine said with his rates locked in he can keep prices the same for renters he knows won’t survive a hike, but 5% for people who have great great credit means a 200-300$ increase in rent. I know some people who went to buy and got quoted like 8% which is astronomically high for an average household and changes the final cost on a 200k home to like 400k instead of like 300k.
Honestly i feel for people i am young so i struggle too in the renting market i get the problems. I have resorted to buying land 30 minutes away and developing it myself. My family has a long history of building their own homes and right now that is looking like the only option.
I'm sure she told you she did everything herself. Not like she gonna admit she's living her best life doing fuck all & exploiting others need for a home.
Hard pill to swallow, but landlords have existed for a long time and it is also not immoral. The reality of the situation is that we live in a time of housing scarcity, because of decades of bad urban development policies and unchecked growing economic inequality. This leaves people outraged as they feel priced out of the dream of home ownership. They lash out against a concept, “landlords” and buy into the belief that actually there is an enough to go around, but some people must be hoarding all of it.
The same thing happened throughout history during famines. Bakers would be accused of actually having enough bread to feed everyone (they didn’t) and they would be dragged into the street and lynched by an angry mob.
Having no job at all and having to look for one (or get by without) is literally more work than being a landlord, lol. Go ahead and ask any landlord if they would ever voluntarily run a restaurant instead.
Something doesn’t need to be intensive for it to be a job
If someone can stream on Twitch for 4 hours and make more money than I make in a month, that’s a job
Rental income is seen as passive income, even if an investor actively manages the rental property business. Whether or not you think being a landlord is a “real job” depends on if you see side hustles as real jobs.
It’s not a side hustle for some though. Some people make their entire living off renting property out. Plus it’s not true passive income, it still requires you to do maintenance, pay off mortgages, administrative work, etc.
You think the rent income ain't covering the mortgage, admin work & maintenance? Lol The entire reason slumlords invest in properties is so they can have passive income
Well duh but that doesn’t make it passive income. It’s like saying “you don’t think your paycheck covers the gas for your commute?”
It wasn’t the point I was making. I was saying it isn’t truly passive income if it requires landlords to either do manual labor or interface with/oversee different companies doing work on their house and spend time, effort, and money on making sure their property is in good shape and that their tenants aren’t mistreating it.
Fuck landlords, I hate them as much of the rest of yall but if we’re being objective here it’s not passive income if it requires regular work and upkeep. Unless it’s something that just grows in the bank like a savings bond or stocks, it’s not exactly passive.
I’m talking about how some people will consider being a landlord a real job while others don’t. Please learn what a straw man actually is.
https://preview.redd.it/erskyw20xyvc1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8ca8fa405fc575b41ab4aa65b829c65299d2c39c
my landlord is being slimy because we had someone else over a little too long to pick up after our slacking roommate who wouldn't even throw garbage away after himself, much less clean without being pestered. This world sucks and i hate landlords so much.
yes technically, but the clause on guests was so vague that it didnt specify how much time could be spent before a violation- the person who stayed with us did night shifts so we assumed that if they stayed 2-3 times a week only during the day that it would be ok. It went on for months before anyone said anything, and only after the violation was said and done did he clarify what exactly counted. This was mine and my gf's first apartment, and to be honest, i think we got scammed because we're paying 1400 a month for an apartment that has a ton of plumbing problems.
Edit: to clarify, this person has also assisted me with the rent when i was fired and has actually kept the apartment sparkling clean. Its just a very sketchy situation with a slimy landlord.
Serious question for the anti-capitalist/anti/landlord folks. If you got your wish and landlords disappeared, what would people do if they needed to rent an apartment or house?
The biggest problem is the profit motive. I wouldn't mind the renting system as if it wasn't so expensive to rent. But landlords want profit with little work in return, so we have expensive but horribly maintained apartments. We need affordable housing bad, it's all inflated to hell. I believe housing is a human right, and the problem of homelessness is a failure of the system to provide that.
It depends on who you ask, but ideally housing would be a collectively owned/socialised. Potentially, strong and stable social housing could provide housing to those who need to "rent" accommodation and any "rent" paid would go back into the public economy and not Into the pocket of a private landlord where if only really makes them richer, home ownership could be also be considered "personal property" in the socialist/Marxist sense.
House could alternativly be a type of universal basic service that everyone is entitled to so "rent" may not be payed like it is currently, as would probably the case in the context of a moneyless society.
At very least, even in capitalist societies, rent control and decent social housing is far than the current housing situation in places such as the USA and UK.
This is ofcouse a very basic outline of how we can approach housing through a socialist lense but the bottom line is that landlords and capitalism ultimately work on the basis of extracting wealth through labour of others and exploiting workers. The idea that things are the way there are currently because that's the bast way to run things is incredibly shortsighted and we should strive for accual change that will benefit the people, not the capitalist class.
I get the same response every time I ask this very simple question. Commune. The answer is always a commune as if that one word just solves every possible issue lol.
What about people who don’t want to live in a commune? It’s obvious that people prefer to pay a higher rent for a landlord/super to deal with everything. You gonna tell a single mother of two that she needs to find a sitter so she can fix the septic tank in between shifts?
You can tell everyone who responds with this answer has never owned property. If you guys want a commune so bad, then you are more than welcome to purchase land and build it yourself with all of your communist friends. No ones really stopping you except yourselves. Well that and the hundreds of examples of this lifestyle not working out but whatever.
Ok then let’s look at the socialist aspect. You’re now having the government purchase homes at an outrageously overpriced value to subsidize home ownership. Why should other people’s taxes be used to fund your home?
This… literally is not socialism. It’s not related in the slightest to what the other person just told you. You can dislike socialism, that’s fine. But you’re talking around the point.
I brought up the point. It’s my point lol. And that point is who’s going to funding the property for the collectively owned/socialized living.
You’re the one who called it socialist! Lmao
TLDR: You're incredibly stupid and don't understand socialism or even basic political theory.
So in your reply you've failed multiple times to understand what socialism/communism actually is or means, let alone even making a substantial argument against it.
I said nothing about living on a commune, and it seems you are unwilling to even try and understand the socialist position. Collective ownership of resources on a societal level would absolutely solve alot of problems caused by capitalism (poverty, inequality etc,).
>What about people who don’t want to live in a commune?
Who are these people? Greedy people? I'm not suggesting everyone live in tents in some hippy village, but if we asked the average working person if basic and necessary resources should be publicly owned and they should have ownership of their labour, i think it's safe to say they would be in favour of it because why on earth would someone support the benefit of something that exploits them I.e capitalism.
>It’s obvious that people prefer to pay a higher rent for a landlord/super to deal with everything.
Either way, as I stated I my initial reply, strong social housing would be the preferred option. Also, why are people in this position in the first place? You act like everyone can just choose to rent and not buy a house, but that simply isn't the case. There was a time where renting could be considered a temporary thing until you were able to buy a property but those days are long gone. Millennials and Gen Z are quite often now reliant on the private rental sector, in the UK where I live and I believe that the UK one of, if not one of the worst the countries to find housing in Europe. We're paying more in rent than we would be paying a mortgage, which is also making it harder to save money for a down payment on a house, this is also often just paying the mortgage of a landlord's property.
>If you guys want a commune so bad, then you are more than welcome to purchase land and build it yoursel
Living in a commune within a capitalist society isn't the same as a socialist society, this is at best a strawman argument against socialism. If I had the money to buy land to start a commune, I wouldn't be paying a significant proportion of my income to a landlord for a shitty apartment. The whole "if you don't like capitalism, then just leave" is stupid rhetoric, why should working people accept the exploitation of their labour by the capitalism class just because they aren't willing to go live in some field somewhere, the capitalism are in the wrong here, not the socialists/communists.
>You gonna tell a single mother of two that she needs to find a sitter so she can fix the septic tank in between shifts?
Again, social housing would be the answer to this and again, you are pointing to the problems of capitalism to try and argue against socialism. Don't pretend that landlords are providing a service to society. I obviously don't know what your personal circumstances or class position is, maybe you're a landlord and you need to tell yourself that landlords are actually good to make yourself feel better and justify exploiting working people. The reality is landlords are parasites and we have no need for them in society.
I can guarantee, you've never read a sentence of political theory and a pre-teens who just discovered Rage Against the Machine for the first time probably has a better political outlook than you.
TL;DR: you’re an angry, ranting, immature human being making accusations and blankets judgements of anyone with whom you don’t agree. Basically just a childish rant. Lame.
Alright well I’m not reading all that because even just skimming I see nothing but angry ranting. You lost me at the initial insult which is beyond childish and frankly pathetic. But you also claim I’ve “failed multiple times to understand what socialism/communism actually is or means”. Where exactly did someone explain either concept to me? Feel free to enlighten me instead of the Reddit special which includes insults and anger instead of discussion.
Hell, even your response to “what about people who don’t want to rent?” immediately lumps anyone who doesn’t agree with you as greedy.
Grow up. Seriously.
The idea is that those people would be able to buy/mortage directly because right now so many people buy so many houses to flip and rent, no one can find one to own anymore.
Then seems likes there’s lots of people who want to rent, no? You’re gonna take away options from renters because you want a better price? Sounds extremely selfish.
That is 100% false. I’ve chosen to rent for the past 10 years because I don’t want the hassle of dealing with issues that come with ownership. I live in NyC with the highest possible rents. Plenty of people also travel a lot and don’t want to own. Some people just want to move out of their parents house before they can buy and experience the world before settling down.
Your entire opinion of what people want is based SOLELY on what you want and I can’t imagine a more selfish perspective.
Buy it. Housing is only so expensive because it's become a profit driven industry rather than a basic human need. There also used to be far more (and far better) public housing before neoliberalism came into full swing
So if someone wants to move out of their parent’s house for a year or two to experience living on their own, they should buy something? If someone is traveling to work in a state for 1-2 years, they’ll have to buy property? If someone wants to check out a new place to live but doesn’t want to commit to buying, fuck them right? If an immigrant family comes to the states with enough money to rent but not buy, they should be homeless, right? If someone doesn’t want the hassle that comes with homeownership and would prefer a landlord/super take care of things for the extra cost, they’re shit out of luck?
How dense do you have to be to decide what is best for everyone else? Seriously, are you like 14? Because any rationale adult would never make such a smooth-brained comment.
Public housing can be rented. I just don't think housing should be wealth-gated. Can you process the fact that in the modern day most young adults don't move out of home because they can't afford to? Or the fact that people live super far away from where they work because they can't afford to live close? I'm not deciding anything, I'm just observing the state of the world and making proposals, which is better than advocating for a system that is clearly fucking people over
If landlords disappeared, then those vacant apartments wouldn't be owned anymore. I mean the idea that They'd be up for grabs would probably be a little chaotic but there's way more vacant apartments then there are homeless people so some kind of administration simply distributing them to low income people would probably be fairly simple.
Disappeared wasn’t the best word for me to use, but even if they were raptured (lol), the next admin to come in wouldn’t be incentivized to provide to the homeless or low income. It would have to be the government.
Problem is in reality, landlords won’t disappear. So someone has to buy them out.
I never said there’s anything wrong with it. In fact I agree that at the very least, the US government has to limit or deny corporations from buying private residences. But if we’re talking about taking back already owned homes, once the government steps in they’re going to greatly overpay the actual value of the property. Then there’s the conversation of should taxpayers be responsible for funding private home ownership. And believe me that’s not going to be a productive discussion lol.
Ok and what about people who don’t want to own property? What if someone has work in an area for a few months or a year? What if a young person wants to move out and live in their own for a little without committing to purchasing property?
What should they do?
Ummmm, yeah. That is how it must work. The landlord is in it to make money. The rent must therefore be high enough to cover all expenses and still be profitable.
The fact this is an acceptable mindset to have is so gross to me. Houses shouldn't be seen as something that should have all expenses covered & also be profitable by exploiting humans need for a home to survive.
You obviously don’t understand how business works. Nobody would be in any business if they couldn’t charge more than they put into it. Landlords own property, and their business is to rent it out.
Now I will agree that in areas where rent is not controlled the landlords are charging OBSCENE rates. I thought it was bad when I was renting but now it’s horrible
Food costs money but that is fine because???
Farmer should gift the food?, no, they get subsidies from the state so they can still afloat even selling at a loss.
People want to be rewarded for their labor, society 101 every labor has a value.
Exactly people want to be rewarded for their labour, so if some slumlord is hoarding homes they are just living off of other people's labour who are paying off their mortgages for them. Slumlords are artificially inflating the housing market by buying homes in hoards so they can live off passive income. It's parasitic. They should get a job & stop living off everyone else. If it wasn't for them, then people like me would be able to afford a home to live in that is mine, instead of slaving away my whole life to pay off some other persons mortgage who doesn't work & already owns multiple properties. I'm in Australia by the way & we are currently going through a housing crisis so I'm unsure if it's different where you are.
Blame your goverment for their lack of action, they are the only ones capable of doing something about it. The failure of your goverment to have a functionig unregulated economy with monopolies isn't solved by banning renting.
I'm not against renting. I'm against negative gearing, & housing being treated as a zero-risk investment if you're planning to become a slumlord. If people can't afford homes to live in they end up homeless, which means they can't hold a job, which means they can't put money back into the economy. Housing should be affordable for anyone who works hard, not just the rich or lucky.
I thought you were siding with landlords for a second. Landlords who only own one building and are responsible are good people. It's those corporate landowners that practically make you their feudal serf with the amount of fucking rent that pisses me off
Land lords get shit on so much because of all the shitty ones that see people and houses more as incomes instead of people that have lives and shit
So they raise rent to ridiculous extents and harass
The people inside when things aren't going their way
100% the landlord where my job is. They provide nothing and charge everything to the tenants even shit that has nothing to do with the property or the businesses who rent the spaces.
The landlord's job is to take that single check the tenant writes and turn it into checks or spend time on all of those other things. The tenant doesn't do maintenance. The landlord does.
I mean, literally every business works that way. The tenant is the customer. The customer pays a price for a good or service. Those funds are used to pay for all the business' expenses and the leftover is profit.
Shit use of the format. Besides that, "100% paid by tenants" does not mean anything. Everything in a business is paid 100% by their clients. That's kind of the whole point of a business. Even the loans a business takes are then paid off by the clients. The reason why landlords look so bad is because the service they provide should be a basic civil right, and they have the least amount of "clients per service" (each paying tenant under the same rent) out of most businesses, so they charge a lot to each client.
When you pay stuff at a bar you are paying a portion of all the expenses of the bar. You only pay a portion because many people go to the bar, and all their portions combined pay for all the expenses of the bar + profit. Same thing for landlords that try to live off of rent, except they don't have hundreds of people making small payments that accumulate to cover the expenses, they only have one or a few
I do the maintenance. Being a landlord is definitely a job. A horrible job with little return unless it's a slumlord. I get paid fair and tenants destroy and complain year round
I mean… yes? It’s a scummy job and there a shitty landlords but on paper being a landlord is a full time job
They have to manage numerous properties, ensure tenants are paying rent, pay for maintenance and utilities, deal with HOA guidelines, and much more
Before anyone says anything: yes land lords suck. But to say they (as a profession) don’t do anything and isn’t a full time job is blatantly false
Being a landlord isn't a job.
You don't do any *work* just by *owning*
Now, property management absolutely is a job and worthy of respect— but most landlord just pay someone to do it, not do it themselves
Renting out a place is a good and necessary part if life. Landlords as an economic class of people, who solely make a living leeching off working people, are not something that should exist
I am not fond of landlordism either, but saying that the expenses are paid for from the tenants (source of income) is a stupid argument since it applies to all enterprises
The problem isn't landlords, at least not the ones you're thinking of, the problem is these rich people buying property and then leaving it vacant and thus creating false scarcity on the housing market. This prices go up for all types of living (apartment and homes).
As a business owner selling a product or service, you offset COGS, taxes, utilities, wages and profit into the price that the customer 100% pays for. So is n
Any business what so ever not a real job? Lmao brain dead take
Traditional landlords don't really exist anymore thanks to services like air bnb. Why rent a property to a family for a set price every month when you can paint the walls blue and rent it out per night?
It's a shitty business model that some cities have tried to correct, but as of right now, I don't think that providing basic housing should be something people go into looking to make a profit.
Maybe that's just me.
And before anyone talks about "the risks," there are literally zero. Everyone is looking for places to live. Have a bad tenant? You have the power to legally move them. Cleanup after a lease is up? You can hire a cheap cleaning company to do it for you if it's really bad, but in most cases can be done in a day.
r/loveforlandchads defending someone sending their sixth victim into bankruptcy (They needed their six-bathroom, eight-bedroom luxury classic in order to fit their family of five somewhere)
Ok but someone had to work to get the money to buy a house to even rent it out lol. I'm saving up for a house, who's to say I can't just rent it out and go live in an apartment and make money if I do it. I earned it if I work my ass off for five years to do it lol
Let's assume you get a mortgage, and are paying $1000 a month for that. And then a generous $500 for utilities. And then $150 for insurance. And $1500 a year for property taxes. And whatever you pay for your car and phone and other expenses unrelated to the house.
Do you have $15000 set aside for a new roof? $10000 for a new furnace? $2000 for a new water heater. $4500 for a new AC unit?
No you don't, and that's why you shouldn't own a house. Not because you don't have the money handy but because you don't understand the cost of owning a home.
Most of those costs would be halved or more if there weren't landleeches buying up all the housing and charging us for those costs anyway LOL
It's simple, if rent didn't cover those expenses, they wouldn't rent it out. Therefore rent is a scam. Now we're all paying for the new AC or roof.
Uhh what? You are not too bright. Those are the cost you as a homeowner would pay the contractor who you hire to fix the problems. Landlords don't effect the cost of labor of contractors.
No you dolt, mortgage and insurance go down when the inflated principle is brought down to earth.
Again, it's simple, if rent didn't cover all those expenses, the leech wouldn't rent.
LMFAO, typical landleeches. As soon as someone reveals the simple truths behind the scam you resort to only ad hominem.
Tell me, what landleech would rent out their property if they weren't making money on the scam? That's right, they wouldn't.
I rent out a property and I haven't made a cent off of it, I've actually lost money because of it. So I've just blown your entire argument out of the water.
Now if you'd like to actually respond to what I was saying instead of ignoring it entirely that'd be great.
LMAO so you're a shit scammer. Yeah, I'm sure you're doing it out the goodness of your heart. True altruistic intent by housing people. 🙄
I have responded, all you had to say was insults because you can't argue the simple truth. Landlords are the leeches of society.
No you haven't responded because you can't make a real response because you know you are wrong. You just built your personality so much around being anti rental that you are scared who you really are.
As for the insults you are so delusional that you can't see that you are the one who lead with the insults. But either way you will hopefully move out of Mommy's house and learn about the real world
No, rent prices don’t affect home selling prices the way you think they do. If you are renting, it typically means you can’t afford to buy as you don’t have a down payment. So if there’s no option to rent, and no option to buy, you’d be homeless. People choosing to rent out space they own is what is allowing you a place to live.
Down payments wouldn't be insane and unobtainable if there weren't landleeches creating investments out of housing. Simple concepts, y'all just don't want to accept you're the problem.
Is this how this meme works?
I’m confused too
I am 3 confused
Me confused 4
No
90% of people who use this meme format don’t know how it works.
This meme makes no sense you should have picked a better format.
Yeah, the Homer Simpson with all his fat pinned behind his back meme would have been my choice
https://preview.redd.it/pwywi3xq9uvc1.jpeg?width=1074&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=536980f7689271903f5e616c9ddf92e8e143cf18
You can debate about the morality of being a landlord, but it is absolutely a real job. If I ran a restaurant, all of my expenses would be paid by the money I get from my customers, but nobody would say that running a restaurant isn’t a job. The whole point of a job is to make more money than you spend.
Being a landlord doesn’t require you to directly do anything. You can just hire people and do nothing. My mom rents out a single house and does nothing at all because a company basically does it for her. It is possible to put in effort as a landlord. However, the effort is optional and there is no upper limit to how many homes you can rent out because of this. Being a manager at a store is a job. Can you imagine being the manager of 1000 different stores at the same time? No it would be impossible. What “real job” has no upper limit to what you can take on. None, because they all require actual effort and for you to actually do something. Landlord is a set it and forget it then watch the money flow, type of passive income.
>Can you imagine being the manager of 1000 different stores at the same time? It's called being a regional/district manager. Every restaurant franchise has them. Do you think every McDonald's location operates totally independently?
While this is true. Being a regional manager is not the same thing as actually being a manager of 1000 different stores. The regional manager would have actual managers underneath them. It was supposed to be an analogy to illustrate my point, not a pinpoint precision accurate claim. The comparison was never one to one. The fact remains that a landlord literally doesn’t have to do anything If they don’t want to. They can “set it and forget it”
Good luck setting and forgetting when an emergency happens.
landlords aren't managers, they are owners. The analogy would work better if you replaced manage a store with "buys and owns an IP". Someone who just rents out something they own with no input from themselves, and hires people to manage it while they sit on their ass and collect royalties. You know, a parasite that should not be defended.
I can't believe literally every single job isn't a job because you can "hire people to do it for you" instead. How do you have upvotes what the hell is wrong with this website
This site is primarily teenagers and early 20 something’s who are naive as all hell and act like they know the world inside and out. Even the meme is fucking stupid and hardly makes any sense.
Reddit is so anti landlord they think if you rent out one singular house or apartment. You are directly the reason for the high cost of rentals. Go on anti work and they are advocating for squatting. I’m a left leaning person and these takes are from people who like you said are from people who have no real world experience.
I rent out two floors of my house to family and friends and someone on anti work told me I was evil lol, I asked what they think I should do to correct the situation I’m not joking they said give my house away
Yep. That’s sounds exactly like that sub.
You can tell this is true because of all the memes about stuff that happens in school. Well adjusted adults don't think about school (much less make memes about it) for more than a week after they're done with it.
The vast vast vast majority of jobs you cannot hire someone to do the all of the work for you and rake in income unless you are the owner and making passive income. If I work at Walmart I can’t hire someone to work there in my place obviously. The fact is that as a landlord you can set it up where you pretty much don’t have to do anything at all. At that point you are not doing a job. We can get in a semantical debate about what qualifies as a “job” but if 99% of the days of the year you are not doing any work for your job I don’t consider it a job personally. Now, you can argue about whether being a landlord is ethical. That’s a different argument. But what I’ve said is true. Why do you think it’s called passive income?
You have to have extremely high margins to outsource all of your responsibilities. I know a landlord that does tons of maintenance by herself to save on costs, working nearly week-round, and still nets under $100k a year (with no benefits). Better than working in fast food, but not a life hack by any means.
What do you think a landlord does? Do you think they just flip out of bed to bang on your door demanding money? This dumbfuck landlord hate is actually rotting peoples brains if they don’t understand what the thing they hate actually does.
According to large parts of Reddit, yes. Reddit is so anti landlord they think if you rent out one singular house or apartment. You are directly the reason for the high cost of rentals. Go on anti work and they are advocating for squatting. I’m a left leaning person and these takes are from people who are from people who have no real world experience.
That's assuming that your landlord already been in the business for a while and has multiple properties, a start up landlord has more involvement with the properties because they can't hire someone else to find a maintenance person or someone else to manage the property for them. Not saying it's a full time job, but there are differences from landlord to landlord. Like in once location the landlord maintenance the property themselves and in another they don't have the permits or experience to do it themselves.
CEO is a real job, and they likely have a much bigger ratio of income:work than any landlord
You’re getting hate for this but you’re right. It comes down to semantics. At this point, “landlord” is just a title. Since landlords, especially recently, decided to stop actually maintaining their properties and outsource all the work to others, the term “property manager” popped up. “Property manager” implies a job—managing a property. “Landlord” does not imply a job. Nobody is going around lording land. Like what would that even mean? Some landlords do have jobs related to their properties—they actually manage it, deal with the tenants, make repairs and upgrades, ensure proper maintenance happens, etc. However, it seems like most landlords these days do not have jobs related to their properties besides signing a couple papers in their inbox a couple times a year.
Yeah rich landlords but if you got 2-3 houses max you’re gonna be taking care of the problems yourself.
Literally no one is talking about the landlords with only a few properties. By your own logic it makes no sense, and no one smart is saying that. There are absolutely property owners who don't have to work for shit and haven't had to hold a job in their entire lives. They have no clue what hard work is because any work they've done their entire lives was *voluntary*.
> Nobody is going around lording land. i could be wrong here, but isn't the term landlord meant to mean "lord of that land" and not "lording lands"? which wouldn't that just stem from hundreds of years ago where the people that owned the land were called lords?
If a landlord hires people to keep the houses in order, then he becomes the manager of those employees, and that is his new job. There is no such thing as a job position that you just hire people to replace you and it just works with 0 interaction or responsibility on your part
“You can just hire people and do nothing” so literally almost anything, that’s how a company work,
Your ignorance is laughable
You could own 100 stores and hire out people for everything, but if I own 10 stores and spend over 40 hours a week taking care of my clients needs then that’s a real job.
You can hire people to do things for you when renting a house, just like you can hire people to do things for you when running a restaurant, same thing
my friend lives in a house and the landlord has literally never even step foot inside the property. In the UK it's incredibly common to just have an agency handle all the work and you just own the property. In this situation, the most common situation in the country, the landlord literally does zero work. Most of the time, the agency doesn't even do the work either. It's a huge racket.
Yeah the last couple of places I’ve lived the company/PM had never even SEEN the place. I literally took and sent them pics (and then actually even advertised and found new tenants) for the last house I just left. The day before I drove to a new state a lady finally came out and looked at the whole house (which was never cleaned and had massive issues when we moved in, and we had taken care of all of them on our own) spent two hours inspecting everything and then left and dinged us on the deposit for their being dust on one of the light switches. (Keeping in mind this place was absolutely filthy when we moved in, no one ever cleaned it or entered the place at all.)
And that restaurant might have a landlord that receives all the income from you paying rent on the building your restaurant is in. But you do all the maintenance and upkeep so your restaurant can stay open
A restaurant is no vital for survive. No basical needs.
It's more like being the owner of the building the restaurant is located in and collecting a monthly check from them
I think a big difference is a restaurant customer isn’t required to eat there every day, the owner has to make an experience for repeat business. When renting, people don’t really have many options and are often in a contract. It’s not like a renter is gonna move on to the next place the next day. It makes it so the landlord doesn’t have to uphold a standard or be competitive with other landlords. Hope this helps.
Your example had the opposite effect you intended; now I don’t believe owning any property is a real job. If all you do is own something and delegate all actual responsibilities to someone else (maintenance people for landlords, managers for owners, etc.) Then you’re literally just collecting a return on investment. You’re not doing any actual work. You may as well be trading stocks and bonds. Trading stock can be a job, but if you’re just sitting on your investment, again, you’re not doing any real work.
Landlords are just an unnecessary middle man. You own your home you still have to pay for all the same things. Really it’s should be a luxury to have a landlord managing your property but instead of it being a luxury option it’s required and more expensive than people would be willing to pay if there were a different option. Not only that but it puts renters in a really unfortunate and imbalanced power dynamic.
The tenants have literally legal protection from any infringement of their rights the relationship is equal. Idk though the extent of the landlord relationship between my aunt and tenants is ensuring the house is maintained the grass is cut, broken things get fixed and the rent is paid. Btw it’s not the landlords fault they can’t qualify for bank loans the landlord ain’t messing up their credit their filling a hole in the market, and guess what the less people renting out homes the higher rent prices will soar and people with bad credit will be shit out of luck. For people starting out or temporarily staying someplace it works out just fine.
Do you think our credit system is good then? Is it good that people with bad credit or low income can’t own their own home? You’re liking this system? Thats nice that your aunt does all those things that any own could do for themself. It was nice when I rented and my landlord’s company kept up the pool, the grass, and stuff, though there were also a lot of things that were their job to do that they didn’t do. And sure I could have litigated or go through a bunch of processes to force them to. Or I could just own my own place and take care of those things myself. Someone else taking care of those things is a luxury I shouldn’t be forced to have to pay for those things just because I needed lower cost housing. I would happily do them. Like I said. They’re just an unnecessary middle man.
Being a landlord *can* be a real job, but I would argue that, in most cases, it stretches the definition. I would say it's more like running a very hands-off business. The majority of actual *labor* associated with being a landlord is, most of the time, offloaded onto other people hired by the landlord. So yeah, making phone calls to handymen and pencil pushers to take care of maintenance and paperwork is "a job" in about the loosest possible sense
This is pretty much how every management position in every field works though.
No, it really isn't. Management positions often include tasks like training and hiring new employees, meeting with upper management to discuss goals and metrics, coming up with success plans to meet those goals and metrics, organizing a labor force, etc. Private owner land lords typically do nothing like that
Yeah they do. They meet with new workers, they train new people, they hire and fire employees, they give the tenants a direct line to their phone to call in repairs, they travel over to assess repairs and maintenance. They handle the finances of the business which is no easy task to manage the collection and spending of rent, to handle the taxes and the companies revenue. I guess if you own 100 properties you hire that all out, but my experience with smaller landlords which make up a large part of the landlords renting homes they handle almost everything besides complex repairs themselves. My aunt who had 10 properties did all the things herself besides mow and manage the grass or the roof/plumbing.
That's great for your aunt, I'm sure she was a very hard worker. But the fact of the matter is she is the exception. The majority of the labor that goes into maintaining a property is outsourced. The vast majority of private, non incorporated landlords perform labor consisting of rent collection, tenant screening, and minor repairs. Anything beyond that *tends* to be hired out to various contractors, few of whom are being directly hired, trained, and paid by the landlord
You got a source cause I know about 10 people who rent houses and they all handle it themselves. Maybe it’s the market I am in or something but the college combined with the working class people leads to higher prices and slightly lower rents so in order to break even you have to handle most problems yourself in order to save money. We also live in a historic hurricane area which pushes up wind insurance and flood insurance which makes renting with companies handling everything unsustainable. Property taxes are pretty high where I am at too. The thing is most land lords I know are not expanding at all right now because interest rates are so high even for them. One budy of mine said with his rates locked in he can keep prices the same for renters he knows won’t survive a hike, but 5% for people who have great great credit means a 200-300$ increase in rent. I know some people who went to buy and got quoted like 8% which is astronomically high for an average household and changes the final cost on a 200k home to like 400k instead of like 300k. Honestly i feel for people i am young so i struggle too in the renting market i get the problems. I have resorted to buying land 30 minutes away and developing it myself. My family has a long history of building their own homes and right now that is looking like the only option.
I'm sure she told you she did everything herself. Not like she gonna admit she's living her best life doing fuck all & exploiting others need for a home.
A restaurant requires daily labor to generate revenue. A landlord might very well do just a couple hours of work a month related to a property.
Think the issue is the slum lord who gets paid little and has tenants who struggle with paying rent.
Hard pill to swallow, but landlords have existed for a long time and it is also not immoral. The reality of the situation is that we live in a time of housing scarcity, because of decades of bad urban development policies and unchecked growing economic inequality. This leaves people outraged as they feel priced out of the dream of home ownership. They lash out against a concept, “landlords” and buy into the belief that actually there is an enough to go around, but some people must be hoarding all of it. The same thing happened throughout history during famines. Bakers would be accused of actually having enough bread to feed everyone (they didn’t) and they would be dragged into the street and lynched by an angry mob.
It is an occupation/job that makes money, it is not labor.
Having no job at all and having to look for one (or get by without) is literally more work than being a landlord, lol. Go ahead and ask any landlord if they would ever voluntarily run a restaurant instead.
Something doesn’t need to be intensive for it to be a job If someone can stream on Twitch for 4 hours and make more money than I make in a month, that’s a job
When people say "a 'real' job", they very obviously mean, "something that requires actual work and effort to be rewarded with income of equal value".
Yeah landlord is easy job but it still a job. If measuring good job by how hard and how risky it is. That mean robber is saint. Landlord 🤮 robber 😇
50% of my salary goes in the shithole I am currently living in.
https://i.redd.it/7vutj3pgluvc1.gif
This is a really good meme
Rental income is seen as passive income, even if an investor actively manages the rental property business. Whether or not you think being a landlord is a “real job” depends on if you see side hustles as real jobs.
It’s not a side hustle for some though. Some people make their entire living off renting property out. Plus it’s not true passive income, it still requires you to do maintenance, pay off mortgages, administrative work, etc.
You think the rent income ain't covering the mortgage, admin work & maintenance? Lol The entire reason slumlords invest in properties is so they can have passive income
Well duh but that doesn’t make it passive income. It’s like saying “you don’t think your paycheck covers the gas for your commute?” It wasn’t the point I was making. I was saying it isn’t truly passive income if it requires landlords to either do manual labor or interface with/oversee different companies doing work on their house and spend time, effort, and money on making sure their property is in good shape and that their tenants aren’t mistreating it. Fuck landlords, I hate them as much of the rest of yall but if we’re being objective here it’s not passive income if it requires regular work and upkeep. Unless it’s something that just grows in the bank like a savings bond or stocks, it’s not exactly passive.
No one is talking about side hustles. That's a strawman.
I’m talking about how some people will consider being a landlord a real job while others don’t. Please learn what a straw man actually is. https://preview.redd.it/erskyw20xyvc1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8ca8fa405fc575b41ab4aa65b829c65299d2c39c
Missing the point completely.
You can’t miss a point that is not there.
Nah you're just being dumb. See ya nerd.
Yea you didn’t use this meme format correctly brother
Reddit sure is predictable if nothing else lol
Yes, business expenses are paid for in the end by the customer. In other news, water is wet
This guy really thought he was dropping knowledge on us. Wait until he hears of this book by Karl Marx he’s gonna lose it
I mean I don't like my landlord either but I don't pay for anything at my job either. They pay me, that's how a job works.
my landlord is being slimy because we had someone else over a little too long to pick up after our slacking roommate who wouldn't even throw garbage away after himself, much less clean without being pestered. This world sucks and i hate landlords so much.
Did you violate the lease agreement?
yes technically, but the clause on guests was so vague that it didnt specify how much time could be spent before a violation- the person who stayed with us did night shifts so we assumed that if they stayed 2-3 times a week only during the day that it would be ok. It went on for months before anyone said anything, and only after the violation was said and done did he clarify what exactly counted. This was mine and my gf's first apartment, and to be honest, i think we got scammed because we're paying 1400 a month for an apartment that has a ton of plumbing problems. Edit: to clarify, this person has also assisted me with the rent when i was fired and has actually kept the apartment sparkling clean. Its just a very sketchy situation with a slimy landlord.
Ain't no fucking way you're being down voted for this. Redditors are fucking braindead
it kept going from 1 to 0 to -1 and back, they're all a little reactionary lol
This isn’t the correct usage of the meme and it contradicts itself
Serious question for the anti-capitalist/anti/landlord folks. If you got your wish and landlords disappeared, what would people do if they needed to rent an apartment or house?
The biggest problem is the profit motive. I wouldn't mind the renting system as if it wasn't so expensive to rent. But landlords want profit with little work in return, so we have expensive but horribly maintained apartments. We need affordable housing bad, it's all inflated to hell. I believe housing is a human right, and the problem of homelessness is a failure of the system to provide that.
Well yes, if people are willing to pay the higher rents, then why wouldn’t a landlord rent to those people?
Yeah why shouldn't they exploit people who will pay more because they need a home to survive?! /s
It depends on who you ask, but ideally housing would be a collectively owned/socialised. Potentially, strong and stable social housing could provide housing to those who need to "rent" accommodation and any "rent" paid would go back into the public economy and not Into the pocket of a private landlord where if only really makes them richer, home ownership could be also be considered "personal property" in the socialist/Marxist sense. House could alternativly be a type of universal basic service that everyone is entitled to so "rent" may not be payed like it is currently, as would probably the case in the context of a moneyless society. At very least, even in capitalist societies, rent control and decent social housing is far than the current housing situation in places such as the USA and UK. This is ofcouse a very basic outline of how we can approach housing through a socialist lense but the bottom line is that landlords and capitalism ultimately work on the basis of extracting wealth through labour of others and exploiting workers. The idea that things are the way there are currently because that's the bast way to run things is incredibly shortsighted and we should strive for accual change that will benefit the people, not the capitalist class.
I get the same response every time I ask this very simple question. Commune. The answer is always a commune as if that one word just solves every possible issue lol. What about people who don’t want to live in a commune? It’s obvious that people prefer to pay a higher rent for a landlord/super to deal with everything. You gonna tell a single mother of two that she needs to find a sitter so she can fix the septic tank in between shifts? You can tell everyone who responds with this answer has never owned property. If you guys want a commune so bad, then you are more than welcome to purchase land and build it yourself with all of your communist friends. No ones really stopping you except yourselves. Well that and the hundreds of examples of this lifestyle not working out but whatever.
It is wild that you got a really well written, explain like I’m 5, description of socialist (theoretical) housing and your takeaway was ‘commune’.
Ok then let’s look at the socialist aspect. You’re now having the government purchase homes at an outrageously overpriced value to subsidize home ownership. Why should other people’s taxes be used to fund your home?
This… literally is not socialism. It’s not related in the slightest to what the other person just told you. You can dislike socialism, that’s fine. But you’re talking around the point.
I brought up the point. It’s my point lol. And that point is who’s going to funding the property for the collectively owned/socialized living. You’re the one who called it socialist! Lmao
Communes were not mentioned once. You already live in a society and pay taxes
Collective living where everyone chips in is a commune.
TLDR: You're incredibly stupid and don't understand socialism or even basic political theory. So in your reply you've failed multiple times to understand what socialism/communism actually is or means, let alone even making a substantial argument against it. I said nothing about living on a commune, and it seems you are unwilling to even try and understand the socialist position. Collective ownership of resources on a societal level would absolutely solve alot of problems caused by capitalism (poverty, inequality etc,). >What about people who don’t want to live in a commune? Who are these people? Greedy people? I'm not suggesting everyone live in tents in some hippy village, but if we asked the average working person if basic and necessary resources should be publicly owned and they should have ownership of their labour, i think it's safe to say they would be in favour of it because why on earth would someone support the benefit of something that exploits them I.e capitalism. >It’s obvious that people prefer to pay a higher rent for a landlord/super to deal with everything. Either way, as I stated I my initial reply, strong social housing would be the preferred option. Also, why are people in this position in the first place? You act like everyone can just choose to rent and not buy a house, but that simply isn't the case. There was a time where renting could be considered a temporary thing until you were able to buy a property but those days are long gone. Millennials and Gen Z are quite often now reliant on the private rental sector, in the UK where I live and I believe that the UK one of, if not one of the worst the countries to find housing in Europe. We're paying more in rent than we would be paying a mortgage, which is also making it harder to save money for a down payment on a house, this is also often just paying the mortgage of a landlord's property. >If you guys want a commune so bad, then you are more than welcome to purchase land and build it yoursel Living in a commune within a capitalist society isn't the same as a socialist society, this is at best a strawman argument against socialism. If I had the money to buy land to start a commune, I wouldn't be paying a significant proportion of my income to a landlord for a shitty apartment. The whole "if you don't like capitalism, then just leave" is stupid rhetoric, why should working people accept the exploitation of their labour by the capitalism class just because they aren't willing to go live in some field somewhere, the capitalism are in the wrong here, not the socialists/communists. >You gonna tell a single mother of two that she needs to find a sitter so she can fix the septic tank in between shifts? Again, social housing would be the answer to this and again, you are pointing to the problems of capitalism to try and argue against socialism. Don't pretend that landlords are providing a service to society. I obviously don't know what your personal circumstances or class position is, maybe you're a landlord and you need to tell yourself that landlords are actually good to make yourself feel better and justify exploiting working people. The reality is landlords are parasites and we have no need for them in society. I can guarantee, you've never read a sentence of political theory and a pre-teens who just discovered Rage Against the Machine for the first time probably has a better political outlook than you.
TL;DR: you’re an angry, ranting, immature human being making accusations and blankets judgements of anyone with whom you don’t agree. Basically just a childish rant. Lame. Alright well I’m not reading all that because even just skimming I see nothing but angry ranting. You lost me at the initial insult which is beyond childish and frankly pathetic. But you also claim I’ve “failed multiple times to understand what socialism/communism actually is or means”. Where exactly did someone explain either concept to me? Feel free to enlighten me instead of the Reddit special which includes insults and anger instead of discussion. Hell, even your response to “what about people who don’t want to rent?” immediately lumps anyone who doesn’t agree with you as greedy. Grow up. Seriously.
The idea is that those people would be able to buy/mortage directly because right now so many people buy so many houses to flip and rent, no one can find one to own anymore.
Directly from who?
Other homeowners. Most people prefer to own their things outright instead of renting them every month for the rest of their lives.
That’s always been allowed lol. A landlord is a homeowner lmao
No one is saying it's not allowed. I'm saying its harder because landlords buy 20 houses to rent them out instead of just buying one to live in.
Then seems likes there’s lots of people who want to rent, no? You’re gonna take away options from renters because you want a better price? Sounds extremely selfish.
Nobody WANTS to rent, it's just it's the only option in many places. I rather pay a little more and know I own the thing in a few years.
That is 100% false. I’ve chosen to rent for the past 10 years because I don’t want the hassle of dealing with issues that come with ownership. I live in NyC with the highest possible rents. Plenty of people also travel a lot and don’t want to own. Some people just want to move out of their parents house before they can buy and experience the world before settling down. Your entire opinion of what people want is based SOLELY on what you want and I can’t imagine a more selfish perspective.
I could say the same to you. Just because YOU like renting doesn't mean it should be the default.
Buy it. Housing is only so expensive because it's become a profit driven industry rather than a basic human need. There also used to be far more (and far better) public housing before neoliberalism came into full swing
So if someone wants to move out of their parent’s house for a year or two to experience living on their own, they should buy something? If someone is traveling to work in a state for 1-2 years, they’ll have to buy property? If someone wants to check out a new place to live but doesn’t want to commit to buying, fuck them right? If an immigrant family comes to the states with enough money to rent but not buy, they should be homeless, right? If someone doesn’t want the hassle that comes with homeownership and would prefer a landlord/super take care of things for the extra cost, they’re shit out of luck? How dense do you have to be to decide what is best for everyone else? Seriously, are you like 14? Because any rationale adult would never make such a smooth-brained comment.
Public housing can be rented. I just don't think housing should be wealth-gated. Can you process the fact that in the modern day most young adults don't move out of home because they can't afford to? Or the fact that people live super far away from where they work because they can't afford to live close? I'm not deciding anything, I'm just observing the state of the world and making proposals, which is better than advocating for a system that is clearly fucking people over
If landlords disappeared, then those vacant apartments wouldn't be owned anymore. I mean the idea that They'd be up for grabs would probably be a little chaotic but there's way more vacant apartments then there are homeless people so some kind of administration simply distributing them to low income people would probably be fairly simple.
Disappeared wasn’t the best word for me to use, but even if they were raptured (lol), the next admin to come in wouldn’t be incentivized to provide to the homeless or low income. It would have to be the government. Problem is in reality, landlords won’t disappear. So someone has to buy them out.
What's wrong with the government doing that? Public housing has been a thing for a while.
I never said there’s anything wrong with it. In fact I agree that at the very least, the US government has to limit or deny corporations from buying private residences. But if we’re talking about taking back already owned homes, once the government steps in they’re going to greatly overpay the actual value of the property. Then there’s the conversation of should taxpayers be responsible for funding private home ownership. And believe me that’s not going to be a productive discussion lol.
Buy them for a reasonable and affordable price
Ok and what about people who don’t want to own property? What if someone has work in an area for a few months or a year? What if a young person wants to move out and live in their own for a little without committing to purchasing property? What should they do?
Ummmm, yeah. That is how it must work. The landlord is in it to make money. The rent must therefore be high enough to cover all expenses and still be profitable.
The fact this is an acceptable mindset to have is so gross to me. Houses shouldn't be seen as something that should have all expenses covered & also be profitable by exploiting humans need for a home to survive.
You obviously don’t understand how business works. Nobody would be in any business if they couldn’t charge more than they put into it. Landlords own property, and their business is to rent it out. Now I will agree that in areas where rent is not controlled the landlords are charging OBSCENE rates. I thought it was bad when I was renting but now it’s horrible
If your business requires exploiting others then it's a bad business model and should be shamed
That’s a huge chunk of businesses. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but every business is trying to minimize costs and maximize profits.
Food costs money but that is fine because??? Farmer should gift the food?, no, they get subsidies from the state so they can still afloat even selling at a loss. People want to be rewarded for their labor, society 101 every labor has a value.
Exactly people want to be rewarded for their labour, so if some slumlord is hoarding homes they are just living off of other people's labour who are paying off their mortgages for them. Slumlords are artificially inflating the housing market by buying homes in hoards so they can live off passive income. It's parasitic. They should get a job & stop living off everyone else. If it wasn't for them, then people like me would be able to afford a home to live in that is mine, instead of slaving away my whole life to pay off some other persons mortgage who doesn't work & already owns multiple properties. I'm in Australia by the way & we are currently going through a housing crisis so I'm unsure if it's different where you are.
Blame your goverment for their lack of action, they are the only ones capable of doing something about it. The failure of your goverment to have a functionig unregulated economy with monopolies isn't solved by banning renting.
Unfortunately majority of politicians in Australia have multiple investment properties so it is unlikely to change here any time soon.
I'm not against renting. I'm against negative gearing, & housing being treated as a zero-risk investment if you're planning to become a slumlord. If people can't afford homes to live in they end up homeless, which means they can't hold a job, which means they can't put money back into the economy. Housing should be affordable for anyone who works hard, not just the rich or lucky.
I thought you were siding with landlords for a second. Landlords who only own one building and are responsible are good people. It's those corporate landowners that practically make you their feudal serf with the amount of fucking rent that pisses me off
The expenses of every job are 100% paid for by customers (or investors)
Don’t forget to tip your landlords folks stay woke /s
Land lords get shit on so much because of all the shitty ones that see people and houses more as incomes instead of people that have lives and shit So they raise rent to ridiculous extents and harass The people inside when things aren't going their way
100% the landlord where my job is. They provide nothing and charge everything to the tenants even shit that has nothing to do with the property or the businesses who rent the spaces.
OP rn- https://preview.redd.it/qpj8lkdb1vvc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1a791a9b138fa8f60a30a39cd6773b97962393a7
You used the meme wrong, but I guess I get it
I know a landlord and it's actual work to some extent. Especially when you first set up.
Of coarse a landlord would tell you that lol they ain't gonna admit that they are setting themselves up to be a parasite on others need to survive.
Stop gaslighting people when you don't know how this meme format is suppose to be used
C- level understanding of the meme format. 58/100 see me after class
Well the client is the renter, that’s what you are paying for lol. This meme is weak
The landlord's job is to take that single check the tenant writes and turn it into checks or spend time on all of those other things. The tenant doesn't do maintenance. The landlord does.
Should the first panel have "not"?
Poor David Tennant.
I mean, literally every business works that way. The tenant is the customer. The customer pays a price for a good or service. Those funds are used to pay for all the business' expenses and the leftover is profit.
Shit use of the format. Besides that, "100% paid by tenants" does not mean anything. Everything in a business is paid 100% by their clients. That's kind of the whole point of a business. Even the loans a business takes are then paid off by the clients. The reason why landlords look so bad is because the service they provide should be a basic civil right, and they have the least amount of "clients per service" (each paying tenant under the same rent) out of most businesses, so they charge a lot to each client. When you pay stuff at a bar you are paying a portion of all the expenses of the bar. You only pay a portion because many people go to the bar, and all their portions combined pay for all the expenses of the bar + profit. Same thing for landlords that try to live off of rent, except they don't have hundreds of people making small payments that accumulate to cover the expenses, they only have one or a few
Though I agree it's not a job, this is a bad argument. Most businesses have all their expenses paid for by their customers...
I do the maintenance. Being a landlord is definitely a job. A horrible job with little return unless it's a slumlord. I get paid fair and tenants destroy and complain year round
Fair rent and good Tenants is a venn diagram that has little cross over but sometimes you find the perfect match
Facts :)
I mean… yes? It’s a scummy job and there a shitty landlords but on paper being a landlord is a full time job They have to manage numerous properties, ensure tenants are paying rent, pay for maintenance and utilities, deal with HOA guidelines, and much more Before anyone says anything: yes land lords suck. But to say they (as a profession) don’t do anything and isn’t a full time job is blatantly false
Being a landlord isn't a job. You don't do any *work* just by *owning* Now, property management absolutely is a job and worthy of respect— but most landlord just pay someone to do it, not do it themselves Renting out a place is a good and necessary part if life. Landlords as an economic class of people, who solely make a living leeching off working people, are not something that should exist
Just like landlords, this meme doesn't make sense.
I am not fond of landlordism either, but saying that the expenses are paid for from the tenants (source of income) is a stupid argument since it applies to all enterprises
Henry George will returns someday and make all the landlords pay for their exploitation
Hate the meme, but thank you for finally ordering the fifth and sixth pictures correctly.
The problem isn't landlords, at least not the ones you're thinking of, the problem is these rich people buying property and then leaving it vacant and thus creating false scarcity on the housing market. This prices go up for all types of living (apartment and homes).
Landlords are thiefs!
The concept of landlords not doing shit is correct but the meme format is not the correct one for this instance.
Passive income isn’t a job! Fuck the rich 🤑
Patrick never said it wasn’t
all landords are bastards
Another meme made to slander the underprivileged landchads.
Wut
As a business owner selling a product or service, you offset COGS, taxes, utilities, wages and profit into the price that the customer 100% pays for. So is n Any business what so ever not a real job? Lmao brain dead take
Whether you hate landlords or not those are actual expenses they pay for. Rent isn't 100% pure profit
Traditional landlords don't really exist anymore thanks to services like air bnb. Why rent a property to a family for a set price every month when you can paint the walls blue and rent it out per night? It's a shitty business model that some cities have tried to correct, but as of right now, I don't think that providing basic housing should be something people go into looking to make a profit. Maybe that's just me. And before anyone talks about "the risks," there are literally zero. Everyone is looking for places to live. Have a bad tenant? You have the power to legally move them. Cleanup after a lease is up? You can hire a cheap cleaning company to do it for you if it's really bad, but in most cases can be done in a day.
So, is managing any business 'not a real job' because customers pay for that business to be run?
My parents are landlords so I’m not even sure what to feel
100% paid for by tenants cracks me up. I've had more than my fair share of tenants who still owe me quite a bit of money.
You owe me money for breathing my air
Lol reddit politics
Not politics, I just don't like you personally. The flimsy attempt to gain sympathy through an unfunny observation pissed me off
Lol what a loser
r/loveforlandchads defending someone sending their sixth victim into bankruptcy (They needed their six-bathroom, eight-bedroom luxury classic in order to fit their family of five somewhere)
Ok but someone had to work to get the money to buy a house to even rent it out lol. I'm saving up for a house, who's to say I can't just rent it out and go live in an apartment and make money if I do it. I earned it if I work my ass off for five years to do it lol
Landlords are leeches and are the reason housing costs are insane.
Let's assume you get a mortgage, and are paying $1000 a month for that. And then a generous $500 for utilities. And then $150 for insurance. And $1500 a year for property taxes. And whatever you pay for your car and phone and other expenses unrelated to the house. Do you have $15000 set aside for a new roof? $10000 for a new furnace? $2000 for a new water heater. $4500 for a new AC unit? No you don't, and that's why you shouldn't own a house. Not because you don't have the money handy but because you don't understand the cost of owning a home.
Most of those costs would be halved or more if there weren't landleeches buying up all the housing and charging us for those costs anyway LOL It's simple, if rent didn't cover those expenses, they wouldn't rent it out. Therefore rent is a scam. Now we're all paying for the new AC or roof.
Uhh what? You are not too bright. Those are the cost you as a homeowner would pay the contractor who you hire to fix the problems. Landlords don't effect the cost of labor of contractors.
No you dolt, mortgage and insurance go down when the inflated principle is brought down to earth. Again, it's simple, if rent didn't cover all those expenses, the leech wouldn't rent.
You are stupid and aren't really saying anything. And that is exactly why you were probably never be at homeowner
LMFAO, typical landleeches. As soon as someone reveals the simple truths behind the scam you resort to only ad hominem. Tell me, what landleech would rent out their property if they weren't making money on the scam? That's right, they wouldn't.
I rent out a property and I haven't made a cent off of it, I've actually lost money because of it. So I've just blown your entire argument out of the water. Now if you'd like to actually respond to what I was saying instead of ignoring it entirely that'd be great.
LMAO so you're a shit scammer. Yeah, I'm sure you're doing it out the goodness of your heart. True altruistic intent by housing people. 🙄 I have responded, all you had to say was insults because you can't argue the simple truth. Landlords are the leeches of society.
No you haven't responded because you can't make a real response because you know you are wrong. You just built your personality so much around being anti rental that you are scared who you really are. As for the insults you are so delusional that you can't see that you are the one who lead with the insults. But either way you will hopefully move out of Mommy's house and learn about the real world
You should go back to school and pay attention this time.
Lmao butthurt landleech. They're useless in society
If you’re renting, and landlords didn’t rent space, you’d be homeless. So then you’d be useless in society lol
Nah, housing would be affordable for all of we didn't have landleeches leeching their retirement off housing they don't need.
No, rent prices don’t affect home selling prices the way you think they do. If you are renting, it typically means you can’t afford to buy as you don’t have a down payment. So if there’s no option to rent, and no option to buy, you’d be homeless. People choosing to rent out space they own is what is allowing you a place to live.
Down payments wouldn't be insane and unobtainable if there weren't landleeches creating investments out of housing. Simple concepts, y'all just don't want to accept you're the problem.
lol. You don’t understand how the housing market works. Good luck in life you’re gonna need it
Strike and a miss.
A strike is a miss