Comment on Confiscate properties from rogue landlords, says senior Labour MP

• Son_of_dad@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Shop owners provide a service and work, they physically work and labor. Landlords do NOTHING. they sit on their ass and collect a paycheck. They’re leeches.

  source

  • tal@lemmy.today ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I mean, the shop owner isn’t necessarily the shop manager, though they can be the same. And landlords can manage buildings.

    But more-broadly, if you own a building, then you’re foregoing whatever benefit you would have derived from your capital that is put into the building if you hadn’t done so. That’s what you’re being paid for – you reduce your standard of living from where it would have otherwise been so that there’s capital to pay for the building. Someone has to build that building, and they won’t do it for free. For a shop, someone’s got to pay for inventory, etc.

    source

    • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I mean, the shop owner isn’t necessarily the shop manager

      Then they own things, not do things - not a job.

      And landlords can manage buildings.

      Owning things isn’t a job. Managing things is. Are you getting it yet?

      But more-broadly, if you own a building, then you’re foregoing whatever benefit you would have derived from your capital that is put into the building if you hadn’t done so.

      Are you going to front the argument that the majority of building owners brought those buildings for a reason other than renting them out? What country do you live in, because this isn’t the norm.

      That’s what you’re being paid for – you reduce your standard of living from where it would have otherwise been so that there’s capital to pay for the building.

      Being a landlord is profitable because your tenants pay more than you do. You’re not reducing your standard of living, you’re increasing it. That’s why people do it.

      Someone has to build that building, and they won’t do it for free. For a shop, someone’s got to pay for inventory, etc.

      What’s the relevance of this to the argument that landlords are lazy leeches?

      source

      • tal@lemmy.today ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Are you going to front the argument that the majority of building owners brought those buildings for a reason other than renting them out? What country do you live in, because this isn’t the norm.

        No. I’m saying that the capital that is in the building would be used for something other than the building.

        The manager has done a similar trade, just with their time that they’d otherwise be doing something else with.

        Being a landlord is profitable because your tenants pay more than you do. You’re not reducing your standard of living, you’re increasing it. That’s why people do it.

        In the long term, that’s what the landlord hopes for, that reducing their standard of living in the now will make them better off in the long run. Same as the person expending their time managing the hing.

        What’s the relevance of this to the argument that landlords are lazy leeches?

        You asserted that landlords don’t do anything. I’m pointing out what they do – they’re the reason that the building is there. If nobody’s going to pay the construction company to build the building, there isn’t going to be a building.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • mannycalavera@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Landlords provide a service. One of a home to rent. It’s no different to renting a car in that sense. They certainly don’t do nothing. They’re responsible for the maintenance of the property (well they are in the UK, I am assuming you’re from the US by your use of the words ass and paycheck). Were cars as scarce as homes and people still needed them as much as they do now you’d see the same thing in the car rental market with extortionate fees for a “service” that people demand. But that’s a condition of the market, blame your government for not providing proper social housing to drive down the cost of private accommodation.

    But landlords are leeches because I don’t like them is such a simplistic answer to a nuanced question.

    source

    • Primarily0617@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Landlords provide a service

      do scalpers provide a service of letting you go see a concert?

      It’s no different to renting a car

      cars depreciate, houses do the opposite

      also, nobody has ever had any issues with the car rental industry

      Were cars as scarce as homes

      golly i wonder why homes are so scarce

      landlords are leeches because I don’t like them

      good thing "i don't like them" hasn't been given as the justification for anything then, isn't it?

      source
• WaxedWookie@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Do you pay those workers significantly less than the value they contribute to the business? What would you call that?

  Independent of that, you may work in the shop, or managing it - that’s a job.

  source

  • mannycalavera@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Surely that depends on the individual business? Like it depends on the individual landlord? Some might be good, some might be bad. Pay is often linked to the risk you have invested in your business. A worker in a shop hasn’t taken on thousands of pounds of business loans for example have they? They don’t have to do accounting admin generally. A renter hasn’t taken on hundreds of thousands of pounds of a mortgage have they? They’re not liable for upkeep of the rental property.

    All I’m saying is that they’re good examples of landlords and bad ones. Good examples of shop owners and bad ones. Skewing the perspective to claim there are only bad is deliberately misleading.

    source

    • hellothere@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Pay is often linked to the risk you have invested in your business.

      This line is routinely trotted out by people who do not understand the very basic facts of limited liability.

      It is trivally simple to establish your business as limited by guarantee, and when done so the risk is literally £1.

      If anyone establishes a business where they are personally liable for any debts, or losses acrued, by thag business then they need to seriously reconsider if business management is for them.

      Now, people may well choose to invest personal savings to start a business, rather than take out a loan, but again, rule number 1 of investing is not to invest more than you can afford to lose, so, again, the actual risk is £1.

      source

      • Maalus@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Not how it works everywhere. Also - bullshit on the actual risk being so low after investing all you can afford to lose - you just lost all you could afford to lose which could be thousands.

        The reality of it is - you rent out an apartment and need to keep it up. I had landlords come in with powerbanks and extension cords in the middle of the night when the breakers failed. I had them loaning me an AC units. They would renovate regularly.

        And I could’ve been a shitty tennant that messed their modern flat, didn’t pay them rent and refused to move out. They would lose a place they lived in for years to some rando off the street.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• BestBouclettes@jlai.lu ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Not necessarily but you can be.

  source