• CannonFodder@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    15 hours ago

    You (and many others here) seem rather confused. Landlords aren’t stopping anyone from buying a house (with a mortgage or whatever) unless they can’t afford a down payment or can’t candle the financial risk. So landlords make it possible for people who can’t buy to have a place to live. The landlord invests their own money and assumes the risks and proves a simple rent arrangement that people who can’t buy can use to have a place to live. Yes, the landlord takes a cut, as they have to put up their own money and take a risk. But if they didn’t take a cut there’d be no point in risking their investment and going through the bother of it all. And if they didn’t do it, people who couldn’t buy a place would be totally screwed.

    • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      14 hours ago

      The existence of Landlords raises the cost of housing, and then they justify their existence by saying housing is too expensive for people to afford. It’s tautological.

      Meanwhile the people paying rent clearly can afford it, because the can afford all the expenses of the house + the extra fees involved for someone being a landlord + the landlord’s profit.