this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2024
1541 points (96.4% liked)

Political Memes

5425 readers
2818 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I didn't say that. Most of the middle class wealth arose from real estate, however Im saying that the "ultra rich" benefit a lot more from real estate than people you describe. But building several housing complex for 10s of millions each absolutely nets you more that a studio apparent in some basement.

Also, what Im saying overall here, regular people would get more real estate in it were not so profitable. Government housing projects that lower market rents are then terrible for ... 'decently wealthy', so none of that?

Also, its not that the usual case is that a landlords would be less 'wealthy' than the tenants they have. So however you look at it, it's a market where your goal is to up the rent as much as possible ("it wasn't me, it's the market, tho my costs didn't even change, lul") over people less fortunate than you that usually don't have another choice.

And no, I don't understand how financial expenses would be cost of ownership. Sure, you can't do it or it doesn't make sense not to take a loan, but that's financial stuff, not ownership stuff, the same way as you job isn't the cost of ownership for a house. It might be in your case, ofc, but there are steps in between.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I didn’t say that.

Sure seemed like you did when you responded to my claim that they would be the only one profiting from it, by saying that is happening now.

Also, what Im saying overall here, regular people would get more real estate in it were not so profitable.

Maybe, but the issue is that if you couldn't use your financing in your calculation on how much rent to charge, only those who can outright buy properties (i.e. the ultrawealthy) would be the ones who could profit from it.

but that’s financial stuff, not ownership stuff

But if you have to finance to own, then it is part of the cost. I don't possibly see how you can argue again this. One could easily decouple the maintenance and taxes from it in the same exact way and say you have to work for the money to pay these things, so it doesn't count.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

I don't think we are following each others thoughts very well here.

You (eventually) cannot have property without maintaining it and paying taxes on it. You can have property without financial leverage or even without buying it.

Im not saying that loan interests and even loan nominal repayments, maintenance, taxes, etc dont get forwarded to tenants, Im saying that only happens because landlords just can do that because are usually in a privileged position to tenants.

I didn't understand your claim why only rich would profit from real estate if real estate would be cheaper (bcs of lower rents/yields). In that case everyone could buy or rent.

And I dont understand how profiting only from the less fortunate wouldn't only lead to more inequality and more extreme conditions on the same market there already are huge issues atm (can't buy a house without a 30y loan, wtf?).