Landlording is detrimental to an affordable housing market, this has historically played a major role in many periods of poverty and wealth disparity issues. This, in turn, plays a party in the increase of crime.
So if committing a felony is bad, thus I should use that as a filter for consideration of a person then I should also do the same to someone who’s choices play a major role in the decrease of QoL for people that has, historically, played a significant role in the increase in crime. I mean, the felon could be wrongly charged, they could have got caught up in something that really didn’t hurt anyone and it has been a long time since, and they are not that person anymore. However, by your logic, it is best to just assume they could be a dangerous felon and just not take that chance. Thus, you could be a small time landlord, who offers a bunch of useful services to those who rent from them, and works hard at keeping their QoL up, or a landlord that rents to own, making little, to no, profit off the tenets. However you could be a slum lord, a landlord participating using price fixing algorithm software services, working as a property investor for some company like black rock, one who regularly increases their rent to be at, or above, the local rent, inflating housing costs, etc. So it’s just not worth my time to risk figuring that out, I should just avoid you because your chosen business is, in the large picture, detrimental to QoL, and most rental properties are owned by shady people, and corporations, that actively make life worse for society beyond the passive stress the business puts on people.
By your own logic I should just assume you are a leech upon society, and avoid interacting you, because most landlording is terrible to society at large.
You are the one that keeps initiating these interactions. I didn’t go to your post and start commenting on it, you have come to mine. I didn’t initially say anything to the other landlord who doesn’t like people saying landlording is bad, I said something to someone else, that person came to me.
If you guys had not decided to send me posts, you would have had no interactions with me. So stop.
What good will it do for you to avoid contact with landlords? If you need to rent, you have to rent from a landlord. If you can afford to own your own house, you’d prefer to do that to begin with.
In my life, when I have found out people make money off renting housing, I scrutinize it enough to see if they fall into one of the categories I previously mentioned, If not, I stopped associating with them. I used to underwrite private loans, including mortgages, and worked in that world. They are designed to push people, at large, into renting, as most financial institutions are heavily invested where renting benefits them. This makes landlords even worse. When I have been forced to rent, I treated them like I was being forced to do business with a crook. Treating them with this assumption has proven to behoove me in numerous occasions. I have never had to rent from someone who didn’t do something shady, if not outright felonious.
Landlording is bad for the working people, drags society at large, and benefits a coercive state of affairs that only benefits huge, shady, investment firms/banks. So, when the poster replied, and said they were a landlord, It just exposed one crook calling out another. Sure, they could be an ethical landlord, but that is unlikely. So it is best to just assume they will fuck you over, just like they look at felons.
Being able to rent a place was very good for me when I was looking for a good job. I wouldn’t be where I am today if I had to fucking buy a place to live every time I job hopped in my youth.
If we didn’t treat housing as a source of profit, and invest vehicles, these types of concerns wouldn’t be the issue they are now. There are plenty of academic papers out there explaining this. wouldn’t take but a few hours of something like google scholar, with search terms like “alternatives to housing as investment and profit vectors” or “housing as a right realized” should bring up more than you could ever read on the subject.
Oh yeah I’m sure there’s been a lot of social studies made about how not giving free housing to everyone is literally racism or something equally dumb.
Oh, an ad hominem attack. This time the accusation of a logical fallacy being used is correct. Instead of bothering to read the research on the subject, and making your argument against the research, you instead make an irrelevant attack on the source based purely on your own biases, and emotional reaction. You have no argument, just the desire for what you do to not actually be bad, partially because you are ignorant to the problems it creates, partially because you don’t like the idea that you are doing something that is bad. This is where a lot of the rage against the science behind climate change comes from. People don’t like being told that what they do, their way of life, is bad.
Come back when you have something other than a blatant logically fallacy to support yourself.
Trust them with what? To rent you a flat for a certain amount of money? Yaknow, goods and services? All the landlords I had were awesome people. Some of them lived in the same house as I rented a room from. I don’t get what you expect out of landlords to hate them so much.
You would have to read a lot of “word vomit” to understand why landlording is bad. Doesn’t have to be from me, you can find it from many different institutions. It is almost like there is a lot of room to screw people over, when you are a landlord, and most do. Especially at an industry/structural level.
Your one mention of conditions, you rented under, would fall under the small exceptions I mentioned. I expect (well expect isn’t a good word, as I fully expect my expectations to go unfulfilled) people to realize landlording is bad, and, in fact, the commoditization of housing is. Then move on to something that doesn’t seek profit from housing.
Excluding target examples that exhibit behaviors I don’t like from a group they/it is identify with?
Where did I exclude the landlords exhibiting negative behaviors from the grouping “landlord” as a rhetorical means of defending the target group? I am saying landlording is bad, period.
Are you saying my inference of a very few select actions can get a pass, to an extent, because they are also working around this structure they are forced to live in, however passively they are contributing to a larger problem. IE someone renting out a room in their house because the “housing as a commodity” market makes is painful to have a house? Is a no true Scotsman fallacy?
You aren’t even insightful enough to know when your logic is being turned against you as a rhetorical device.
Except there is no logic turning here. And you wouldn’t rent out a flat to a murderer either.
Landlording is detrimental to an affordable housing market, this has historically played a major role in many periods of poverty and wealth disparity issues. This, in turn, plays a party in the increase of crime.
So if committing a felony is bad, thus I should use that as a filter for consideration of a person then I should also do the same to someone who’s choices play a major role in the decrease of QoL for people that has, historically, played a significant role in the increase in crime. I mean, the felon could be wrongly charged, they could have got caught up in something that really didn’t hurt anyone and it has been a long time since, and they are not that person anymore. However, by your logic, it is best to just assume they could be a dangerous felon and just not take that chance. Thus, you could be a small time landlord, who offers a bunch of useful services to those who rent from them, and works hard at keeping their QoL up, or a landlord that rents to own, making little, to no, profit off the tenets. However you could be a slum lord, a landlord participating using price fixing algorithm software services, working as a property investor for some company like black rock, one who regularly increases their rent to be at, or above, the local rent, inflating housing costs, etc. So it’s just not worth my time to risk figuring that out, I should just avoid you because your chosen business is, in the large picture, detrimental to QoL, and most rental properties are owned by shady people, and corporations, that actively make life worse for society beyond the passive stress the business puts on people.
By your own logic I should just assume you are a leech upon society, and avoid interacting you, because most landlording is terrible to society at large.
Yes please leave us alone thanks.
I do, don’t worry yourself.
Judging by the fact you keep replying in this thread, no you don’t.
You could always just stop interacting.
Unlike you, I never claimed to not interact with other people.
You are the one that keeps initiating these interactions. I didn’t go to your post and start commenting on it, you have come to mine. I didn’t initially say anything to the other landlord who doesn’t like people saying landlording is bad, I said something to someone else, that person came to me.
If you guys had not decided to send me posts, you would have had no interactions with me. So stop.
What good will it do for you to avoid contact with landlords? If you need to rent, you have to rent from a landlord. If you can afford to own your own house, you’d prefer to do that to begin with.
In my life, when I have found out people make money off renting housing, I scrutinize it enough to see if they fall into one of the categories I previously mentioned, If not, I stopped associating with them. I used to underwrite private loans, including mortgages, and worked in that world. They are designed to push people, at large, into renting, as most financial institutions are heavily invested where renting benefits them. This makes landlords even worse. When I have been forced to rent, I treated them like I was being forced to do business with a crook. Treating them with this assumption has proven to behoove me in numerous occasions. I have never had to rent from someone who didn’t do something shady, if not outright felonious.
Landlording is bad for the working people, drags society at large, and benefits a coercive state of affairs that only benefits huge, shady, investment firms/banks. So, when the poster replied, and said they were a landlord, It just exposed one crook calling out another. Sure, they could be an ethical landlord, but that is unlikely. So it is best to just assume they will fuck you over, just like they look at felons.
Being able to rent a place was very good for me when I was looking for a good job. I wouldn’t be where I am today if I had to fucking buy a place to live every time I job hopped in my youth.
If we didn’t treat housing as a source of profit, and invest vehicles, these types of concerns wouldn’t be the issue they are now. There are plenty of academic papers out there explaining this. wouldn’t take but a few hours of something like google scholar, with search terms like “alternatives to housing as investment and profit vectors” or “housing as a right realized” should bring up more than you could ever read on the subject.
Oh yeah I’m sure there’s been a lot of social studies made about how not giving free housing to everyone is literally racism or something equally dumb.
Oh, an ad hominem attack. This time the accusation of a logical fallacy being used is correct. Instead of bothering to read the research on the subject, and making your argument against the research, you instead make an irrelevant attack on the source based purely on your own biases, and emotional reaction. You have no argument, just the desire for what you do to not actually be bad, partially because you are ignorant to the problems it creates, partially because you don’t like the idea that you are doing something that is bad. This is where a lot of the rage against the science behind climate change comes from. People don’t like being told that what they do, their way of life, is bad.
Come back when you have something other than a blatant logically fallacy to support yourself.
Yeah I’m not reading that vomit of words you typed up. You wouldn’t trust a felon with your life savings. If you would, you are a moron.
If you trust landlords, you are a moron.
Trust them with what? To rent you a flat for a certain amount of money? Yaknow, goods and services? All the landlords I had were awesome people. Some of them lived in the same house as I rented a room from. I don’t get what you expect out of landlords to hate them so much.
You would have to read a lot of “word vomit” to understand why landlording is bad. Doesn’t have to be from me, you can find it from many different institutions. It is almost like there is a lot of room to screw people over, when you are a landlord, and most do. Especially at an industry/structural level.
Your one mention of conditions, you rented under, would fall under the small exceptions I mentioned. I expect (well expect isn’t a good word, as I fully expect my expectations to go unfulfilled) people to realize landlording is bad, and, in fact, the commoditization of housing is. Then move on to something that doesn’t seek profit from housing.
Ah yes the “no true scotsman” fallacy in all of its glory.
Excluding target examples that exhibit behaviors I don’t like from a group they/it is identify with?
Where did I exclude the landlords exhibiting negative behaviors from the grouping “landlord” as a rhetorical means of defending the target group? I am saying landlording is bad, period.
Are you saying my inference of a very few select actions can get a pass, to an extent, because they are also working around this structure they are forced to live in, however passively they are contributing to a larger problem. IE someone renting out a room in their house because the “housing as a commodity” market makes is painful to have a house? Is a no true Scotsman fallacy?