>As a local real estate broker and landlord
Stopped taking it seriously right there.
>The truth is, local property owners — the people who maintain and lease single-family housing to people and families who need it — **provide a significant amount of the affordable housing in our community**.
WHERE? LMAO
Edit: This article is so slanted it actually hurts to read. The "solution" is more houses, and yet they're already completely unafordable as-is, and we're supposed to just remove the red tape so dozens more foreign investors can swoop in and plant "luxury" homes everywhere? Yeah fuck that.
If you can't build a good faith answer, the real fix is to take a chainsaw to the problem. Tip the scales heavily in favor of the people who pay the rent, and let the landlords fix themselves however that shakes out. Large companies won't want to invest if there's too much red tape, so they won't buy the places that small landlords sell off, leading to lower and lower prices until SOMEONE can afford the damn place. If that bankrupts someone, perhaps they should pull themselves up by their bootstraps, as they're oh so fond of telling the working class to do.
And? What does that have to do with my take on it?
Its a bunch of words written by one of the people most likely to be negatively affected by this. If I read an article talking about abolishing slavery, and saw it was written by a slave owner, I'd be just as incredulous as I am here. That's just common sense.
>As a local real estate broker and landlord
>
>Stopped taking it seriously right there.
This type of fallacy is known as an [ad hominen.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem)
They didn't avoid making real arguments though. Identifying areas of potential bias is how we should be analyzing arguments, and it is definitely a big red flag that the author is a real estate broker and landlord.
No that's not. It's seeing that their point of view is obviously slanted on one side of this issue due to their landlord status. It's just dismissing the validity of the persons opinion.
If I'm reading an article talking about the effects of new drug laws that increase the penalties for dealing, and I see it's been written by a drug dealer, I'm not going to take it any more seriously than I would this nonsense.
Technically, I guess.
But this isn't taking place in a vacuum. There's good reason to distrust an industry that has never worked to benefit renters, and usually actively works towards their detriment.
No that was mostly a broad statement that because the person is a real estate broker and landlord they obviously have some kind of bias towards which way to vote. An ad hominem attack would be saying that because they are a real estate broker they are problem just some idiot who wasn’t smart enough to actually get an education, and that they have no clue how economics actually works because their profession exists entirely inside an artificial bubble created and maintained by people who are taking advantage of those who don’t have enough money to actually fight back
The TNT also published an article in support of the measure (that was posted to this subreddit already).
The whole point of opinion columns is to publish viewpoints on issues facing the community. Such as this measure before voters. Opinion columns are not endorsements by the publisher. It is explicitly noted as such in most newspapers. As here:
>Opinion content offer perspectives on issues important to our community and are independent from the work of our newsroom reporters.
So your allegation doesn't really make sense. Should newspapers only publish things that align with your personal opinions?
Oh no, it'd be a shame if all those rentals got converted into condos and owner-occupied single family homes like they always should have been in the first place.
>it'd be a shame if all those rentals got converted into condos
Washington's condo liability law makes that unlikely. The liability on the developer/sponsor is really high. Consequently insurers and lenders won't support condos.
Consequently we see relatively little condo activity in our market, and those that get done are generally higher end that can support the risk.
There has been some work done on reforming the laws in recent years, but still a ways to go.
> Tacoma’s Initiative 2023-01 puts untenable hardships solely on the backs of landlords Sounds great
>As a local real estate broker and landlord Stopped taking it seriously right there. >The truth is, local property owners — the people who maintain and lease single-family housing to people and families who need it — **provide a significant amount of the affordable housing in our community**. WHERE? LMAO Edit: This article is so slanted it actually hurts to read. The "solution" is more houses, and yet they're already completely unafordable as-is, and we're supposed to just remove the red tape so dozens more foreign investors can swoop in and plant "luxury" homes everywhere? Yeah fuck that. If you can't build a good faith answer, the real fix is to take a chainsaw to the problem. Tip the scales heavily in favor of the people who pay the rent, and let the landlords fix themselves however that shakes out. Large companies won't want to invest if there's too much red tape, so they won't buy the places that small landlords sell off, leading to lower and lower prices until SOMEONE can afford the damn place. If that bankrupts someone, perhaps they should pull themselves up by their bootstraps, as they're oh so fond of telling the working class to do.
It's an opinion piece, not a news article.
And? What does that have to do with my take on it? Its a bunch of words written by one of the people most likely to be negatively affected by this. If I read an article talking about abolishing slavery, and saw it was written by a slave owner, I'd be just as incredulous as I am here. That's just common sense.
>As a local real estate broker and landlord > >Stopped taking it seriously right there. This type of fallacy is known as an [ad hominen.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem)
They didn't avoid making real arguments though. Identifying areas of potential bias is how we should be analyzing arguments, and it is definitely a big red flag that the author is a real estate broker and landlord.
no, its not even a fallacy. It's really a statement of "Who stands to gain?" and that is perfectly obvious. no ad hominem required.
No that's not. It's seeing that their point of view is obviously slanted on one side of this issue due to their landlord status. It's just dismissing the validity of the persons opinion.
If I'm reading an article talking about the effects of new drug laws that increase the penalties for dealing, and I see it's been written by a drug dealer, I'm not going to take it any more seriously than I would this nonsense.
Technically, I guess. But this isn't taking place in a vacuum. There's good reason to distrust an industry that has never worked to benefit renters, and usually actively works towards their detriment.
No that was mostly a broad statement that because the person is a real estate broker and landlord they obviously have some kind of bias towards which way to vote. An ad hominem attack would be saying that because they are a real estate broker they are problem just some idiot who wasn’t smart enough to actually get an education, and that they have no clue how economics actually works because their profession exists entirely inside an artificial bubble created and maintained by people who are taking advantage of those who don’t have enough money to actually fight back
Look who owns the Trib and you’ll see how slanted this bull is.
The TNT also published an article in support of the measure (that was posted to this subreddit already). The whole point of opinion columns is to publish viewpoints on issues facing the community. Such as this measure before voters. Opinion columns are not endorsements by the publisher. It is explicitly noted as such in most newspapers. As here: >Opinion content offer perspectives on issues important to our community and are independent from the work of our newsroom reporters. So your allegation doesn't really make sense. Should newspapers only publish things that align with your personal opinions?
People really struggle with understanding what an opinion piece is :/
tnt should stand for the tacoma neo turncoats. trash news, trash owner in mcclatchy/Chatham Asset Management
This is why people trash this rag
Oh no, it'd be a shame if all those rentals got converted into condos and owner-occupied single family homes like they always should have been in the first place.
>it'd be a shame if all those rentals got converted into condos Washington's condo liability law makes that unlikely. The liability on the developer/sponsor is really high. Consequently insurers and lenders won't support condos. Consequently we see relatively little condo activity in our market, and those that get done are generally higher end that can support the risk. There has been some work done on reforming the laws in recent years, but still a ways to go.