Happy Labour Day to people who are not landlords.

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context

405 comments

How am I making your point? You litteraly said that you could not afford the place, so you rented it out instead.
Someone is paying your mortgage for you because you cannot afford it, and then you will kick that person out when you want to. That person will then have to move again in a market that gets worse by the month.
I'd say that is pretty bad all around.
- How can I not afford the place? This is just to make my life easier I would not artificially make it harder on me if I can rent it to some europeans that will stay on a sabatical in my country.
  What is my other choice? Leave the place abandoned for a year until I move? Prices get worse every year and I found a great opportunity to buy now instead of wait until I could buy it without a bank loan. Prices doubled because I waited so this time I don't want to wait. My mortgage is 25% of my salary that's not bad is it?
  
  You said that you rent the property you bought because that is the only way you could do it. That is litteraly your first sentence.
  Someone else is paying your mortgage right now so that you can move in later.
  I am not sure what else can be said.
  
  Same not sure how I can explain myself better so let's just disagree and move on
  
  This really goes to show that being a landlord requires no intelligence whatsoever.
  
  No one is paying for his mortgage. Someone is paying for a rent. If you think this is bad, then rent should be outlawed.
  
  The rent that pays the mortgage he couldn't afford to pay. All rent is is paying someone else's mortgage.
  
  Let's say the mortgage is payed. Then the rent pays whatever the landlord decides to do with that money. Like literally any other transaction.
  
  Owning multiple homes for profit is a large part of the current crisis. People shouldn't be able to withhold homes and hold them ransom.
  
  I agree, but limiting rights is not a good way to approach the issue. Raising taxation on 2+ properties is much better. And perhaps there are even better approaches, but an not an economist.
  
  No one has a right to own multiple properties
  
  What about multiple of anything? How about 2 cars? After all, each car takes limited parking space and adds to traffic problems. How about eating more calories than one needs to live? Should we review all existing items that one can buy?
  
  One problem at time. Using the overwhelming tactic is just that, a tactic. Just because there are other issues we face, doesn't mean we shouldn't fight this battle. But at the end of the day the answer is yes- we should review all existing items that one can buy. Have you seen the state of the environment lately?

405 comments