Reason I’m asking is because I have an aunt that owns like maybe 3 - 5 (not sure the exact amount) small townhouses around the city (well, when I say “city” think of like the areas around a city where theres no tall buildings, but only small 2-3 stories single family homes in the neighborhood) and have these houses up for rent, and honestly, my aunt and her husband doesn’t seem like a terrible people. They still work a normal job, and have to pay taxes like everyone else have to. They still have their own debts to pay. I’m not sure exactly how, but my parents say they did a combination of saving up money and taking loans from banks to be able to buy these properties, fix them, then put them up for rent. They don’t overcharge, and usually charge slightly below the market to retain tenants, and fix things (or hire people to fix things) when their tenants request them.

I mean, they are just trying to survive in this capitalistic world. They wanna save up for retirement, and fund their kids to college, and leave something for their kids, so they have less of stress in life. I don’t see them as bad people. I mean, its not like they own multiple apartment buildings, or doing excessive wealth hoarding.

Do leftists mean people like my aunt too? Or are they an exception to the “landlords are bad” sentinment?

  • Don_alForno
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 days ago

    If that means the government* subsidises it for the low income families (as in owns them and rents them at below market value), so be it.

    Not everybody who doesn’t want to buy is low income. I’m too lazy / risk averse to maintain everything myself, so I happily pay my landlord a reasonable premium to bear the risk of shit burning down (or breaking in less dramatic ways) for me. I also like that I would be able to pack up and move without worrying about selling my old place. I might change my mind later on, but right now I’m good.

    Why should governments subsidize the lifestyle choice I’m consciously making?

    • Lemming421@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      To be clear, I wasn’t trying to say ALL rental housing should be subsidised, just that there should be a healthy supply available for local councils to make available to people who need it based on whatever criteria they set for that.

      Even when I was renting, I’d earn too much to qualify. People with young children would take priory over single people. That sort of thing.

      It’s not a perfect system, but it’s better than companies gaming the system to maximise profits at the expense of the most vulnerable.

    • Pandantic [they/them]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      If you’re not low income, they can rent it to you at the cost of maintenance + mortgage, fees, and taxes + a bit extra to account for future maintenance. This would make it a fair price and would extract no excess value from you.