317
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] tinfoilhat@lemmy.ml 83 points 4 months ago

What if we make it illegal to own more than 2 residential properties. Yes, 2. Why 2? Because it won't pull votes away from assholes with a summer house.

AND let's make it illegal for corporate entities to own livable units, and force them to sell via eminent domain within 180 days.

[-] Landless2029@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago

Don't make it illegal. Make it unprofitable.

Increasing taxes per property owned.

On 3+ extra taxes and huge fine if not rented for more than 3 months of the year.

We have an issue with comapnies and foreigners apparently buying property in cities then leaving them empty. Tax them HARD.

Much more likely to pass a plan like that then just making things illegal.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Nah, illegal, and a fire sale.

[-] 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

so just to be clear, does this mean two apartment properties, two buildings, or two units?

[-] TheEntity@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago

I'd say two thingies that can fit a single household each. So no, a hotel or an apartment complex wouldn't count.

[-] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago

In some areas there's nothing but plexes available. I'd say one plex=one property. Even if it has multiple units.

[-] TheEntity@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Then these shouldn't be privately owned as a whole, wasn't it the OP's point?

[-] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 5 points 4 months ago

There is some advantages to renting sometimes. I don't think all properties should be for ownership only.

If you have to stay somewhere temporarily for a few years and intend on eventually moving, maybe you don't want to go through all the hassle of buying a property. Renting is a simpler solution.

Or if you don't want to be responsible for your residence, its maintenance, fees, taxes, etc. and rather let someone else take care of it, you can rent and let the landlord take care of everything.

Of course, capitalism and greed completely fucked up the whole system. Without strong regulation, there's going to be abuses by anyone driven by greed.

Not all landlords are rat bastards. Some actually do care about their tenants and their well being and comfort. Just as there are tenants who just wreck everything in their residence and make a living hell for their neighbors and landlord.

I've been on both sides. I rented for nearly 10 years and had to deal with an asshole landlord at the beginning. The new landlord kept my rent the same for 8 years because she didn't want to lose me since I was a good tenant who took care of my home. When my girlfriend and I finally moved in together, she kept her condi and decided to rent it in case our relationship didn't work out after moving in together. And she's had some awful tenants who destroyed her place. Right now she has good tenants and we're doing our best to provide them a comfortable living space while being fair. We're not looking to make profit off the tenants. Hell she's even renting lower than what it actually costs to keep the place! Losing a couple of thousands per year on taxes and condo fees and replacing furniture when it breaks.

But, I gotta say, the rental market is plagued with greedy sociopaths and it's hard to feel any sympathy towards any landlord.

[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

You can still live on a property you don't own without having a landlord. Housing cooperatives are a collective ownership of the property where you elect a property management board from the residents and pay a membership due for living there. There is no profit or excessive rent because it's all money that belongs to you collectively.

[-] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago

Have you ever lived on a co-op?

In a co-op, you are a partial owner of the property. You still have to go through all the hurdles to get a mortgage, but it's not difficult. Plus you have to deal with the risk of other co-op members defaulting on their loan. And you still have to participate in the maintenance and responsibilities. It's not as simple as just renting a place.

https://www.ratehub.ca/blog/the-pros-and-cons-of-buying-a-co-op-property/

[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Not all co-ops function that way. There are co-ops in my city exactly as I described. The process is even similar to applying to an apartment.

Edit: because the capitalist system is a fucking leech I had to look up the different types. I'm referring to "non-equity" co-ops. You're referring to strata co-ops. Imo, those defeat the point of cooperatives.

[-] bstix@feddit.dk 7 points 4 months ago

The politicians to make such a law probably have at least 3 residential properties. One regular home in their state, one close their job in Washington and one for recreation.

Anyway it wouldn't solve the issue. It would likely just create an illegal market.

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

Like that time John McCain couldn't remember how many houses he owned...

That was fun.

[-] bstix@feddit.dk 4 points 4 months ago

Maybe he just didn't want to disclose the house where his mistress lived.

[-] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 6 points 4 months ago

The one in Washington DC is rented and paid for by taxpayers. It's part of the perks of being a politician.

[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 3 points 4 months ago

Are you sure about that? If that's true, it's very new:

Under the new system, lawmakers can get reimbursed for hotel stays as well as utilities and insurance for property rented or owned in the capital. Members who bought property will not be able to claim reimbursement for principal or interest on their mortgage, but rental costs will be eligible to claim. The daily rate is capped at between $172 and $258, depending on the month.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/07/house-finalizes-expenses-plan-00090806

[-] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago

Ah ok. I might be wrong then. Normally politicians get a rental unit to live in near their place of government.

[-] ccunning@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Wait - are you canceling hotels?

[-] SeattleRain@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

No, you can still own ONE hotel. The reason why hotel prices are so high in the US is because of the Patel Cartel.

[-] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 months ago

The Patel Hotel Cartel? Do tell.

[-] SeattleRain@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

They own a bunch of chain hotels (Best Western?), and fix prices. The US has among the highest rates for hotels in the developed world. I recently went to Germany and for the same price I got 4 star amenities for what I'd pay for a very basic motel.

this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2024
317 points (97.0% liked)

politics

19096 readers
2413 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS