• Rivalarrival
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yes, and no. They are more likely to switch to a different strategy, such as a private mortgage or land contract. Large apartment complexes will likely convert to condominiums or co-ops.

      Basically, if we raise the rate and credit high enough, the landlord will be able to get a better return with one of these other options than they could get from renting.

      All of these other options are permanent agreements, with terms established from the start. The landlord can’t arbitrarily raise rent every year. The tenant gains equity from day one.

      Basically, I’m killing the concept of renting. It needs to die in a goddamn fire.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        A big reason this happens is because…they can do it.

        Increase overall housing supply enormously through better zoning laws, and increase affordable housing supply by having ~30% of housing be government-owned at a reasonable cost, and it becomes much less viable to raise rent a bunch.

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yeah, you’re not going to tax parasites off the host. We need regulations limiting corporate ownership of residential property.

      • thesporkeffect@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Defense in depth. One’s a more difficult target and it’d be foolish to abandon a near term improvement because we want a better option 10 years down the road. Do both.

      • Rivalarrival
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        So long as the property is desirable to corporate owners, they will be fighting to get around those regulations.

        By increasing the tax rate substantially on non-occupant owners, we make residential property far less lucrative for corporate owners.

        When they can make more money selling and lending on the property than they can make renting it, mission accomplished.

        • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          So long as you have blood, ticks will try to bite you. Increasing the taxes would be a good way to increase tax revenue, and we should do it, and corporate real estate investors will fight it like hell, but there isn’t any reason to think it will discourage predatory behaviors.

          If they can make more money selling and lending on the property, you get the 2008 bubble all over again.

          Capitalists are going to capitalize. Regulation is the only weapon against abuse. Taxes are a good start, but it won’t be enough.

    • SeattleRain@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      No because not all landlords are capitalized equally. A new investor with a huge mortgage would. An old landlord with paid off property wouldn’t. Unless they collude.