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?

  • XeroxCool@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 days ago

    What’s the difference between profiting from stocks or profiting from rent? Either way, I’m increasing my spending power

    • Fondots@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 days ago

      People need a place to live, they don’t need stocks to live. By owning more properties than you need you are contributing to a scarcity and inflated pricing for a basic necessity.

      • XeroxCool@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        If we lived in a dream where housing was somehow always provided, sure. But we don’t. So what to all the people who don’t have savings for a down payment do if the only option is to buy? Not live anywhere?

    • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      Your stocks do not deprive anyone else of an essential human need, while owning and renting out a house you do not personally use artificially deprives another of buying that house, which further raises housing prices, making an essential human need, an investment vehicle.

      Using a different analogy, if you lived in an area with scarce water resources, but happened to purchase land with a particularly abundant spring, you could then profit handsomely by selling that water to the thirsty at an extremely high rate, exploiting the human need for water, and depriving those who cannot afford it in exchange for your own enrichment.

    • TranquilTurbulence@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      If you buy stocks, you’re essentially just hoping to find someone who is willing to pay more for the same thing. If you own property and rent it out, you’re providing a service to someone who needs it. In the latter case, you’re creating value.

        • CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Rental income is just a dividend on a real estate investment. Even if you own the house you live in, you get that dividend in the form of not having to pay rent to a landlord.