• HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    9 months ago

    Focusing on AirBnB is better in my opinion because of the difference between the two.

    A company buying a home to rent still has to rent the property, so they aren’t removing the housing supply. In contrast, a person or corporation buying a home to use as an AirBnB is removing housing from the market.

    • LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Companies should not own houses. Residents of houses should own their own houses.

      Nobody should own someone else’s house. A roof over one’s head is a basic human right. Not an extortionate investment.

      The problem with companies owning hundreds of houses is that they hire property management companies to manage these houses that were built by the lowest bidders and everybody blames each other when something needs to be maintained and the maintenance never gets done and the people living in the houses suffer because they are paying their hard-earned money to these companies while their shoddily-built houses are falling apart.

      remember there are real actual humans hiding behind the facade of these corporations, greedy extortionate millionaires & billionaires thriving on exponential dollars from poor people’s paychecks, and this needs to be stopped.

        • Olgratin_Magmatoe@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Those should be co-ops/non market housing.

          And if the incentives for new co-ops to be made isn’t enough, it’s time for the government to finance/build/zone for new ones. If the government just fucking spams medium and high density housing in the form of co-ops, bans corps from owning housing, bans AirBnB, etc, it would very quickly fix the housing crisis.

    • legion02@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      I’m 5050 on this. At least the airbnb is making money for people (generally) instead of a massive Corp. I. Reality both suck but I think I’d rather a person benefit.

      • Threadsdeadbaby@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        I make a living cleaning short term vacation rentals. I also have no savings and cannot afford to buy a home. I’m almost 40 yrs old and never have I been in a position to consider purchasing a home. Rent is my life now :'(

      • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I feel like the harm to a community of removing housing is worse than someone in the top 10% having another investment vehicle.

        • Adalast@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          I can tell you that it is all harmful. My landleeches have acknowledged that the house we rent needed maintenance before we moved in and have done literally 0 of it in the last year, opting to instead use my wages to improve the other 24 properties they purchased in bulk from a retiring landleech. Then they have the audacity to attempt to illegally evict me and my pregnant wife when I start asserting my rights, and tell prospective landlords we are “problem tenants” who have paid every rent payment in full and on time for the entire lease.

          No, there needs to be mandatory, city/borough-wide rental associations that have the legal authority to hold landleeches accountable. It needs to be mandated at the federal level and it needs to have serious teeth.