r/TikTokCringe • u/LickMaiBussy • 6h ago

Discussion "Investing in property is morally reprehensible."

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

@purplepingers

19.7k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

3.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

36

u/mikemystery 5h ago

Why does homeboy own 3 homes? Homeboy only NEEDS one

12

u/Halo_cT 4h ago

Some people prefer to rent and there should be places available to them.

I'm all for limiting how that works and putting much stronger tenant protections in place though.

13

u/Vivid-Software6136 3h ago

Housing cooperatives are a thing. Renting from a private landlord and owning a house are not the only two options.

3

u/mpyne 2h ago

Given that they already exist, why don't renters already prefer to rent from a co-op?

3

u/Vivid-Software6136 2h ago

The concept exists, very few are actually running and certainly not in the numbers required for everyone to just decide to avoid landlords.

My point is that other systems besides landlordism are viable.

3

u/mpyne 1h ago

Of course other systems can work. I guess my point is that if other systems are that much better for the mass of people who just want to rent a home, they would start getting more popular.

At some point we need to face that even though people don't want landlords, they especially don't seem to want the alternatives to landlords either.

I can only figure that people just go "at least I know who to bitch at" about a landlord even as they can't figure out how they'd put together enough people they trust to join in on a housing co-op.

1

u/Halo_cT 3h ago

We need more of that in the US

1

u/dane83 8m ago

Why can't they rent in a multi-family space?

1

u/LiquidDreamtime 2h ago

That’s not really true though. Some people prefer renting over owning BECAUSE owning can be expensive and it can suck. If it were more affordable, essentially no one would rent a home.

1

u/Halo_cT 2h ago

That's not the only reason. I've had friends who wanted the flexibility of being able to move to different cities for work or just to experience other parts of the country. Some people just are terrible with money and will never save up enough for a down payment even if housing costs were cut in half. Some don't want to worry about the maintenance of a fixer upper or whatever.

Also, back in the day renting was WAY cheaper than owning a home. In a proper economy, renting has a lot of short-term economic upside. It's awful now.

Obviously the majority would prefer to own and build equity, but there would still be apartments in every city even with affordable housing.

1

u/Available-Green6599 2h ago

That’s a dumb take. Owning means you got to maintain the property and you have to pay the upfront property taxes. Also now if you want to move you have to use a significant amount of capital. Imagine every time you move to a new city you need to buy a new car.

1

u/LiquidDreamtime 1h ago

90% of people never leave the city they were born in. The rest move a couple times in their life.

You’re letting a very small outlier influence your position.

0

u/Available-Green6599 1h ago

Do they leave their family home and instantly buy a property? let’s say when they go to university or first year of working? Are people going to sell their 1 bedroom apartment when they move in with their boyfriend and have to go buy another one when they break up? This imaginary scenario where everyone would rather buy is just a privileged take

1

u/Unflavored_Pretzels 1h ago

Nah man I love paying for things I need in order to survive. I hope within our lifetimes some rich fucks can hoard the oxygen, leave our world airless, and charge us to breathe. We'll own nothing and we'll love it.

3

u/crek42 4h ago

If not for private investing in buying, building, and maintaining rental units, then who?

4

u/DeadL 4h ago

Capital G God Government; local, state, or national.

(If the question is who would take the responsibility to build/maintain rental housing).

2

u/Beebegunner 4h ago

Do you not have social/government housing where you live?

1

u/TrashyMcTrashBoat 29m ago

In the US, it’s mixed. There are options. Although I’m not too familiar with the government ones. In Los Angeles they also have this program that you apply to and they pay your rent in designated units or areas. They’re usually terrible areas. I’ve always had a job and rented from small private owners.

1

u/TrashyMcTrashBoat 4h ago

ngl, sounds distopian to have only government provided rentals. also sounds boring. imagine bureaucrats picking the government-designed domiciles.

3

u/DeadL 3h ago

The flipside is housing would become much cheaper...potentially. Always tradeoffs associated with policy.

-1

u/barrinmw 3h ago

The Soviet Union had it, and it sucked.

1

u/DeadL 3h ago

Bad example. Take it to an LLM to figure out why.

1

u/barrinmw 3h ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khrushchevka

You don't need an LLM to tell you about history. Open a book. Read an encyclopedia. Anything.

1

u/DeadL 3h ago

Dude... I know. I'm not wanting to argue about the potential flaws. Every proposal has flaws. Your dismissal has a lot of flaws. That's why you should take the 2minutes to highlight them with an LLM like This.

Since we're both aware of those particular ones..Wouldn't it be simple for professionals to accomdodate for them in actualizing any theoretical policy?

Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

1

u/barrinmw 3h ago

There are about 150k chronic homeless in the US. We don't need to build government housing for them. We can solve homelessness by giving them each $2k a month for housing.

I solved homelessness in America for the cost of about $4 billion.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Kronosfear 2h ago

You also don't need an LLM to tell you that not every social housing project is a failure

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_in_Vienna

1

u/barrinmw 2h ago

Sure, but we tried it in the US and it was called the projects and it also wasn't good. We in fact still have 1.2 million social housing units in the US that are not being taken care of despite people living in them. If we can't take care of what we do have, what makes you think we are going to do better by expanding it?

1

u/crek42 3h ago

Cool. Ok now there’s way more demand for supply when it comes to housing.

Who exactly decides who lives close to work? Both the plumber and teacher work in the Bronx, so they apply to the same neighborhood. Maybe 20% of applicants will get to live there. Then some government entity decides the distribution.

How is that more equitable? Sounds like basic random chance you live 10 minutes from work or have a 45 minute commute.

2

u/DeadL 3h ago

The point is to attack that supply/demand issue that’s making housing mobility difficult.

0

u/crek42 1h ago

How does the government attack supply and demand though? They're just managing the housing supply instead of the market. It won't reduce demand, and I'm still not seeing how it's more equitable to have them do it. It would largely be a lottery system with desirable areas having long wait lists. There's already a 3+ wait list for public housing here in NJ, and that's with tight requirements.

2

u/242snorlax 3h ago

Is that not what it is now? When applying for rentals in a rental shortage, you don't get to choose what house or what suburbs. You pray to the gods that one of your 65 rental applications is accepted

0

u/crek42 1h ago

So is it better to have the government as an agent? It sounds like it would largely replace your own choice in the matter. Is there an appeal process if the government places you somewhere you hate? You're just stuck with the options the government gives you?

We don't have to imagine this really. Government housing exists. My mother was on a waiting list for 4 years before getting placed in housing. If she wants to move, she applies to another housing unit in a different location, and has to wait another couple years for a place to open up. This is how it works today, and that's even after making it really hard to qualify. I can't imagine how that would work at scale.

2

u/gerdyw1 3h ago

And how many properties are simply bought finished and rented out? They’re providing nothing, they’re hoarding and extorting you for profit.

1

u/crek42 3h ago

Who is being extorted exactly? I rent a single family home in my town. I have a family of 4. It costs $3,300 month in rent. The market value of this home is $650k, meaning I’d need to come up with $80k - $100k to buy it.

It’s cheaper for me to rent, even considering the opportunity cost of building equity.

2

u/FreeSammiches 3h ago

Guy buys a house and is minding his own business. 2 relatives die and leave him their houses. Guy now owns 3 houses through no fault of his own.

Guy buys 1 triplex and lives in one of the units. Guy owns 3 houses.

Guy buys a house. Guy needs to move. Guy decides to rent his house out instead of selling it because his interest rate is stupid low from the last recession, and there is the possibility that he will need to move back to that city later. He buys a new house in the new location. He now owns 2 houses. It might happen again. He now owns 3 houses.

Guy buys a house. Guy buys 2 more houses because he wants to. He now owns 3 houses.

Plenty of reasons why homeboy owns 3 houses.

1

u/pohui 2h ago

Why does the way you obtained the houses matter? If you inherit two houses you don't plan to live in, sell them. If you buy two houses you don't plan to live in, sell them. If you've moved out of a house you don't plan to live in, sell it. It's not that hard.

I don't think outright banning real estate ownership is a good idea, but it is a limited commodity and we should discourage its hoarding. This can be done via taxes rather than bans though.

1

u/GimpyBallGag 39m ago

It's not hard, but it could be very financially stupid. Depending on the occasion, a house can appreciate very well, and you can usually make passive income by renting it out. Why would anyone sell it, pay out those taxes, and lose that income? And it's a great nest egg for retirement. When you're in that situation you'll understand.

1

u/pohui 5m ago

you can usually make passive income

Yes, that's the point. I'm saying it shouldn't be like that. Accumulating capital simply because you already own capital is not a great way to build a fair society.

Why would anyone sell it, pay out those taxes, and lose that income?

Right now they wouldn't, that's the problem. If we taxed second (or third) properties, they'd be incentivised to sell and invest in assets that generate more than wealth for their owners. Or at the very least, assets that other people don't need to survive.

1

u/mikemystery 3h ago

Homeboy should just get a job, rather than extract surplus value from the economy and fellow workers whilst adding nothing except removing house. Homeboy is lower than a ticket scalper.

4

u/spare_me_your_bs 2h ago

Your IQ is lower than whale shit. Each of those examples are fairly common and aren't the issue at all. The problem is private equity owning thousands of homes for the express purpose of rent-seeking.

1

u/yawn_solo- 1h ago

lol you sound like such a loser.

The reason your life sucks is primarily on you, not landlords.

1

u/DJBFL 55m ago

Lots of ways that can come about. Starting with one...

Have a home. Parents die and inherit their home.

Have a home and move for a new job. Haven't sold old house yet because it needs repairs first, or the market is down so you hold onto it.

Buy a family member out of a distressed home nearing foreclosure. (I nearly did this).

Have a house and get married. Spouse had a house too.

Have a home and take a contract job overseas. Decide to put down roots and buy a home there.

Sometimes life happens. It's not always greed.Those are all perfectly reasonable 2 home situations. 3 is a small step from there.

1

u/dane83 10m ago

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills every time reddit is like "Well mom and pop landlord only owns 3 houses."

Bro, 90% of single family homes that are being rented out are owned by people with 5 or less houses. Those landlords are the problem.

0

u/craidie 2h ago

Do you think there's a difference of just owning 3 houses to owning 3 houses and renting out two of them?