• Lyrl@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      If a landlord who actually takes their job as servant to their tenants seriously gets some efficiency of scale - say enough units to justify a full time maintenance person who is available on call to support tenant issues - I don’t want to punish them for that. Surely we can develop metrics to identify predatory landlords that are more accurate than number of properties.

      • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Nah, number of properties is a pretty fucking good metric.

        Being a “bad” landlord isn’t the issue, the issue is taking properties off the housing market for rent collection, and driving up prices for everyone else in the process.

        There are more empty units in this country than unhoused people to fill them, this housing crisis is one built entirely out of artificial scarcity created by letting speculators buy up supply basically for the purpose of scalping them to poor people who can’t say no to the product.

        It’s the same kind of “market efficiency” that has ballooned medical costs, who can afford to compare costs on a kidney transplant? Nobody. Who can afford to shop around and wait on houses? Unless you’re very lucky in today’s economy, also nobody.

        Housing does not abide the same market rules as designer T-shirts. Necessity goods will inherently have a hostage effect on the customers where you could in theory charge any price and just make the disinfortuned eat shit for it.

    • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I was thinking more non-occupancy just meaning “that you don’t live in yourself”, so that would mean filling your rentals with tenants doesn’t save you from the tax.