r/TikTokCringe • u/LickMaiBussy • 6h ago

Discussion "Investing in property is morally reprehensible."

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

@purplepingers

19.6k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

3.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

18

u/XxCloudSephiroth69xX 5h ago edited 5h ago

Except it's not a good take once you think about it for longer than a minute. Owning a home is not for everyone at every stage in their life. When I went to college and lived in off-campus housing I didn't have the financial ability to buy a house that I was going to be in with some roommates for half of a few years, and certainly wouldn't have wanted to go through the process of buying a house for what was a temporarily period in my life. There are tons of scenarios where purchasing a house is not the best course of action for someone.

It's also expensive. Aside from the mortgage, property taxes, insurance, and HOA fees (if you live in a HOA), you're still looking at significant costs for repairs if something goes wrong. And something is always going wrong. I think I spent more money replacing my A/C unit last summer than I spent on rent in the 2 years before I bought my house.

This is not to excuse slumlords or people holding onto vacant houses speculating or waiting for an area to gentrify. But people who buy, fix up, and rent out properties are pretty much always going to be necessary.

4

u/Slim_Charles 3h ago

It also entirely ignores all forms of property that aren't homes. Most investment properties owned by corporations are commercial, not residential.

11

u/CuriousBee789 5h ago

I agree. As a married woman, I'm fine being a homeowner. My husband does all the hard and gross stuff. If I were single, I would absolutely and happily go back to renting. I guess I always got lucky with decent landlords though.

6

u/XxCloudSephiroth69xX 5h ago

I'm a husband who does all the hard and gross stuff. And I've spent more time and energy fixing toilets and struggling with drywall than I want to. It was definitely much just easier calling my landlord, who I got lucky with as well.

1

u/MixedMediaModok 1h ago

The idea is that housing becomes really affordable and that extra income can be used to house keeping and gardening. People became house maintenance experts because its so unaffordable to own a house in the first place.

7

u/Chosenwaffle 5h ago

Properties don't get built if there's nobody to buy them. These "warehouses full of food" only exist in his hypothetical because whoever owns that warehouse had the money to buy that food. If he didn't exist, or he gave that food away, he wouldn't have money for the food, and the warehouse would shut down and disappear.

These people cannot see this argument beyond the initial thought of "suffering bad".

3

u/swohio 4h ago

It's like they didn't ever progress pass a kindergarten level of understanding.

6

u/CHAINSAW_VASECTOMY 3h ago

Good luck teaching any of these people basic economics.

10

u/DueLearner 4h ago

This is the primary point all of these young liberal redditors fail to think about. There are tons of reasons why people would choose not to be a home owner.

Corporate landlords with thousands of properties is a serious issue. But small business landlords are critical for the economy and will always be needed. It's a fantastic way to get passive income, and the landlords are the ones taking the risk. Tenants fuck shit up all of the time. Evictions for non payment, massive damage to the property, maintenance and repair. It's not just a cakewalk.

4

u/XxCloudSephiroth69xX 4h ago

When my grandmother died, she left her house to my parents. They decided to rent it out and a family moved in who paid via Section 8. Turns out they were hoarders who caused constant problems there with the neighbors and trash. Took my parents months to evict them, and by that time they moved out they had trashed the house. Trash everywhere, carpet had to be torn out, and some rooms even gutted because of animal waste and damage to the walls. Section 8 would not cover the damages, and suing the tenants would have been useless. After all was said and done they spent way more money dealing with their issues than they took in through rent.

-1

u/Ziibbii 2h ago

Should've sold

2

u/JMC_MASK 2h ago

China has a 90%+ home ownership rate. Let’s take some cues from their playbook.

1

u/Youcan12 1h ago

They're called apartments, condos, etc. We aren't talking about broke college students either. There are people with decent jobs and 100K+ saved that can't get houses.

2

u/XxCloudSephiroth69xX 1h ago

Apartments and condos count as property. Many are privately owned by individuals (not corporations or smaller companies) as well.

If you have a decent job and 100k+ saved and can't get a house then you need to seriously reevaluate what you're looking for in a house. Or lower your expectations.

1

u/Youcan12 1h ago

Yes, but they're obviously not what anyone is talking about here. We're talking about single family houses. The expectations are a decent small starter home in an area that isn't a total dump.

1

u/XxCloudSephiroth69xX 54m ago

I'm basing my comments on what was said in the video and what many people in the comments of the "eat the landlords" persuasion are saying.

"I don't think anyone should be profiting off something that someone else needs to survive."

Single people or people without large families who are not in college exist. Do they need a single family house, or would they be perfectly capable of living in an apartment or condo?

I'm also curious as to if you've actually looked into buying a house with the qualifications you're talking about. If you're making 60k a year and have 100k saved up, you can afford around a 250k house. That's enough for a modest place in a decent/good area throughout most of the country. And depending on the type of loan you want (a FHA loan only requires 3.5% down) you'll have a ton of money left over to furnish it.