42
submitted 1 year ago by grte@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

Nope. Even setting aside rental income, the increase in property value itself has been plenty remunerative. Having the building paid off also allows one to borrow against the value of the asset, which offsets some opportunity costs.

I’m surprised people are actually arguing that real estate investors haven’t been richly rewarded enough. Ridiculous.

[-] Rocket@lemmy.ca -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Even setting aside rental income, the increase in property value itself has been plenty remunerative.

You are entering personal opinion territory with that remark, which has no place in a discussion, but I will stricken the opinion part and work with what information remains. Given that, I take it to mean that a business seeking profit does not necessarily need to find profit by way of cashflow, but rather asset appreciation. Is that a fair assessment?

That is technically true. Agriculture in particular loves that model – and it has burned many, many, many farmers before. Remember the 1980s? They had to go as far as to have concerts to try and bail farmers out because it got so bad. It is super high risk. Farmers will often put up with that insane risk because they have a passion for farming and will take the risk just so that they can do what they love.

Does anyone have a passion for being a residential landlord? To the best of my knowledge, the answer is no. Landlords are in it purely as a business. And a business is going to focus on income fundamentals to not go down the road of needing concerts to save them when the promise of asset inflation fails.

Of course, with big risk comes the potential for big reward, but it seems there is no reason for residential landlords to take that gamble. It is not a passion project.

[-] SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago

I don’t know where you got the idea that profiting off of land value is some exotic and untenable investment strategy, one that requires “insane risk” and “passion”. Your example of landlords being reduced to desperate concerts is very silly.

You dismiss this as “personal opinion” without explanation, but the objective fact is that land value has gone up a lot in Canada, and real estate has tons of arbitrary tax advantages (like the Smith Maneuver). This has made real estate a remunerative investment. That’s been the consensus of the domestic and international investment community, which has poured money into Canadian real estate. This is so obvious, I’m surprised I’m having to say it!

[-] spacecowboy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

Are you responding to someone named “Rocket” by chance?

[-] SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

I am. What’s going on? Does it not show up that way on everyone’s account?

[-] spacecowboy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

Nothing nefarious or anything; I blocked them a while ago and I see they’re still being an edgy contrarian and pissing people off. I had noticed a bunch of comments that seemed out of place and had a hunch it was Rocket. Haha

[-] Jmdatcs@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Yes it's very remunerative. But have you stopped to consider it could be even more so? /s

this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2023
42 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

7187 readers
423 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS