You have to realise that landlords aren’t the plague. They’re the buboes. A symptom.
If you can take your spare money (a concept from days gone by, I know), buy a house for X, rent it out for Y a month, then finally sell it in 20 years for Z, and be 99.99% guaranteed to make more money from it than you can from pretty much any other source, then why wouldn’t you?
Remove the incentive for that (homes that don’t go up by more than the inflation rate), there will be no need for them to exist.
But in any case, the size of the building projects required would likely be government level anyway, and they can be the “landlord” for anyone not wanting to buy. This was called council houses in the olden days, before Maggie Thatcher killed that.
While I understand your point, I don’t think I fully agree with it. If house prices are connected to inflation, what is there to stop somebody from buying a house and renting it out.
The rent money is used to buy a second house and so on. The price of houses will go up, and so will the rent. But the houses themselves were bought at a lower price, so house prices going up would not have any influence on the landlord.
In the meantime the rent keeps going up, reultiyin more profit in the end.
Now of there would be a taxation based on actual worth of a person. And the amount of taxation is based on the minimal income in a country…
Maybe a bit farfetched and I do not know if I explain it in a way that I get my idea across.
If house prices were directly connected to inflation, there would be no issue.
But they run far above inflation. This is what gets a pack of landlords involved.
There’s a point where putting your money into a basic stock market tracker gives a better return than landlording. That’s when they go and do that instead. It’s a lot less up front investment, and a lot less risk.
It’s mostly the spiralling house prices that attracts the landlord class, not the rent. The house is making money even if there’s nobody in it. Rent is just the icing on the cake. Right now they just cannot lose.
You have to realise that landlords aren’t the plague. They’re the buboes. A symptom.
If you can take your spare money (a concept from days gone by, I know), buy a house for X, rent it out for Y a month, then finally sell it in 20 years for Z, and be 99.99% guaranteed to make more money from it than you can from pretty much any other source, then why wouldn’t you?
Remove the incentive for that (homes that don’t go up by more than the inflation rate), there will be no need for them to exist.
But in any case, the size of the building projects required would likely be government level anyway, and they can be the “landlord” for anyone not wanting to buy. This was called council houses in the olden days, before Maggie Thatcher killed that.
one home per person, no homes owned by businesses
apartment buildings become condos, each unit owned by a person to do with as they please
woodchip any business owners who fight back against the new regulation
I realize that not all landlords are to blame, just the greedy ones. There are way more of those.
While I understand your point, I don’t think I fully agree with it. If house prices are connected to inflation, what is there to stop somebody from buying a house and renting it out. The rent money is used to buy a second house and so on. The price of houses will go up, and so will the rent. But the houses themselves were bought at a lower price, so house prices going up would not have any influence on the landlord. In the meantime the rent keeps going up, reultiyin more profit in the end.
Now of there would be a taxation based on actual worth of a person. And the amount of taxation is based on the minimal income in a country…
Maybe a bit farfetched and I do not know if I explain it in a way that I get my idea across.
If house prices were directly connected to inflation, there would be no issue.
But they run far above inflation. This is what gets a pack of landlords involved.
There’s a point where putting your money into a basic stock market tracker gives a better return than landlording. That’s when they go and do that instead. It’s a lot less up front investment, and a lot less risk.
It’s mostly the spiralling house prices that attracts the landlord class, not the rent. The house is making money even if there’s nobody in it. Rent is just the icing on the cake. Right now they just cannot lose.