• 0 Posts
  • 54 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 20th, 2023

help-circle

  • This is simply not true. Most of the single family dwellings rentals are owned by regular people. If you think the average person can throw down on a $800,000 mortgage at 6% and pay $8000 a year in property tax plus other expenses just to hedge inflation, you are as delusional as most of the people I’ve run into on this site. Just do the simple math on how much rent you would have to charge to break even on a rental if you wanted to be a land lord tomorrow, then see if you could just sit on a $50,000 loss per year. Jesus. I’m about done with Lemmy. People here are dumb as shit




  • Rental income is taxed at 100%, FYI.

    I think carrot works better than stick. Instead of punishing everyone who made an investment, and spending god knows how much money to enforce it, just offer a one time capital gains exemption on any investment single family dwelling that has rental income for more than a year. But make that exemption dependent on the sale going to someone who doesn’t already own a home. (No landlords scooping up extra properties) this puts sellers in connection with buyers and since the seller is getting a big payout they can do the extra leg work. I bet many of the properties get sold to existing tenants.

    The government gets an easy cost effective way to free up supply, and it doesn’t actually take money out of their pocket. (Just removes future tax income). Limit the program to no more than 3 years. Anyone who is a casual landlord will jump to get out. Boomers in retirement will jump at it as they will have owned these properties for years. This will free up supply in months, not years. Everyone I know who owns rentals that I discussed this with said they would sell if they could avoid capital gains.

    That’s my $0.02. FWIW










  • Honestly? I went into it as an investment, from a capital appreciation stand point I have done very well. I’ve mentioned in another post that I basically charge minimum rent (30% below market). When I had kids I thought the properties would provide decent income for the kids so it would supplement what they earn in the long term. But then one of my children ended up with a life long disability. My properties are in a condo/town house community close to many amenities. It’s very possible they may end up living in one of the properties while the other parts for their expenses. If I had wanted to get out I would have done so last year. But as it turns out I may actually need the properties to ensure my kid doesn’t end up as a disabled homeless person. So at the end of the day, I’m not interested in making money off the properties, I just cover expenses. It’s probably who I’ve had the same tenants for 12 years. I literally don’t even remember their names.





  • Most legal action will not involve the direct supervisor, and it probably shouldn’t. A direct supervisor could have stepped in here and possibly made a difference. However, the idea that a direct supervisor will by design know when to violate company policy in order to safeguard an employee is not feasible… The company managers and those who are responsible for implementing state laws for protecting employees need to be held accountable. Direct supervisors should be documenting the policy issues that are a problem, and helping the union stewards to get the policies changed. In a perfect world… Unfortunately most companies hate working with unions and managers are too removed from the issues that are harming employees. The current system sucks.