Renters will always exist, and some will be unable or unwilling to adhere to the contract they signed. Like all contracts, there are penalities for non-compliance (on both sides).
These leases generally are not a contract between equals. One party owns extra housing. The other owns none and gets charged for this fact. It’s institutionalized exploitation. Legal, sure. People being unable to pay for a basic necessity while others have so much that they can profit off it - its not unreasonable to call this “sad”.
Groceries and other necessities are produced. Rent and mortgage payments are based on selling access to resources - nothing of value is produced through rent extraction. It is a purely parasitic process economically.
There is indeed a case to be made for universal access to basic necessities but the case against rent extraction is more basic than that.
To your point about people preferring renting to owning who have the option of both, I am not directing my argument against this case but the general case instead - most people do not have the option of affording housing except through the rentier capitalist avenues of rent or mortgage. It is these people who are being parasitized by this form of economic activity.
> Rent and mortgage payments are based on selling access to resources - nothing of value is produced through rent extraction. It is a purely parasitic process economically.
I have to assume you have never been responsible for maintaining a property. Unless someone is renting out a cave on a triple net lease, your statement above is hilariously inaccurate.
> most people do not have the option of affording housing except through the rentier capitalist avenues of rent or mortgage.
If most people can't afford it, then why do most people live in a home that is owned by a member of their household (either themselves, or their parent/guardian)?
1) Costs of maintaining a property are productive but typically less than 50% of what rent pays for. The rest is purely extractive going to rentier profit and mortgage (what I’ve been talking about).
2) Less than 40% of households are fully owned. The rest have mortgages or are rented.
1. You did not start off talking about mortgages, you lumped it into your initial grievance once that didn't land. If you can't accept that debt exists and the reasons why it exists, you're going to be sorely disappointed by virtually all of your interactions with the rest of humanity.
2. Of course, people with mortgages are still considered property owners legally and by nearly all of society.
Rentier capitalism is term that has been used to include mortgages for decades. It’s not my term. Mortgages and rent parasitize the working class. Rent extraction (broader than just literal rent) is nonproductive cashflows from the working class to the wealthy. You may cheer this on, that’s fine with me. I’m just calling a spade a spade.
If you had, I would have probably not wasted my time on this discussion with a leftist who might as well be arguing that humans should breathe water instead of air.
Sorry to disappoint you stranger. What I said applies to both mortgages and rent. And housing can be decommodified to our common benefit - for example, Vienna - it’s not some impossible goal. And on a wider level if you ever wonder why China is outcompeting us in many sectors it’s in large part because they have invested in their economy instead of letting rentier capitalists run rampant. It makes the workforce cheaper to employ. We on the hand are suffering a deepening housing crisis..
Yep. A lot of these regulations end up hurting small landlords because only corporate landlords with a large number of units can comply easily and absorb costs of bad tenants.
Our society prioritizes the narrow interests of rentier capitalists over the working class. Unfortunately this means the US is losing international competitiveness across more and more industries. For one thing rent extraction ultimately gets financed by employers through higher wages, thus productive business loses out to business from a region like China where costs of employment are lower. Rather than making economies more efficient like productive business is supposed to do, rentier capitalism means cash flows from the debtor to the creditor class, which forms a feedback loop as the creditor class is able to use this cash to buy more assets and extract more rent simply by expanding its circle of ownership.
Real estate prices are controlled by supply and demand. If you want a lower cost of living than desirable places in the US, alternatives (like China, or the Rust Belt) exist.
And if you think housing prices are bad in the US, you should look at the rest of the developed world.
