Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Comment
[i]Italic Text[/i]
[b]Bold Text[/b]
[spoiler]Spoiler Text[/spoiler]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace Text[/pre]
[super]Superset Text[/super]
[sub]Subset Text[/sub]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists
File

Sandwich


420chan is Getting Overhauled - Changelog/Bug Report/Request Thread (Updated July 26)

Houses are for assholes

Reply
- Wed, 14 Aug 2019 02:02:58 EST Q7G8h1M0 No.4891237
File: 1565762578009.jpg -(82399B / 80.47KB, 800x480) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Houses are for assholes
Who the fuck wants to pay $1200 a month plus tip when you can just live in the forest for free
>>
Captain Paul Rice - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 08:06:19 EST Nes7WXBF No.4891272 Reply
1565784379030.jpg -(119513B / 116.71KB, 960x720) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>4891237
Who the fuck tips their landlord?

I'm with you about living in the woods. Settlements are land as hell. But hot running water will always win.
>>
King of All Cosmos - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 08:13:13 EST 9Un2rbyb No.4891275 Reply
>>4891272
Who tips their land lord? The japanese pay a thing called Key money once a year or so to their land lord as a thank you for letting you live there....but its sort of like tipping in america, it's not "required" but it is.

I lived in a tent for almost the last 4 years.
It was ok but miss electricity and toilets and heat / AC
>>
Betsy Simblewell - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 08:14:55 EST E2Obc5ZJ No.4891276 Reply
>>4891237
>Tipping the landlord
What fresh hell is this? If you're tipping the landlord, then I fully support you living in the forest.
>>
Joseph Favre - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 09:59:35 EST P6n7T2JL No.4891300 Reply
if i'm ever buying a house it'll be deep in the mountains
also this >>4891276 wtf is up with americans tipping everyone they interact with? lmao
>>
Barry Cockethroat - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 10:00:50 EST sVlGi/lg No.4891301 Reply
>>4891237
You can't live in the forest for free, I tried it, they have government dudes who kick you out after a couple of weeks. I guess maybe you could do it on private land but then the government dudes can take you to jail if they catch you.
>>
AliceMedgekan.raw - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 10:12:32 EST Q7G8h1M0 No.4891305 Reply
>>4891301
Depends where you're at. SoCal? Yeah, those NIMBY fucks will hunt you down. They hate the homeless.

But there's plenty of states where it's doable. You can stay on state land for 14 days where I'm at, you just have to bounce around if the cops find you.
>>
Isaac Newton - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 10:19:32 EST ePBPuvQ3 No.4891306 Reply
1565792372146.jpg -(11395B / 11.13KB, 355x241) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Yo fuck that, I just head down to the cemetery and bunk with a body for the night.
>>
Clown Reuben - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 10:25:56 EST MaJtujm/ No.4891307 Reply
1565792756129.jpg -(124966B / 122.04KB, 900x891) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>4891275
I already knew the Japanese had a culture of obedience, deference to authority and worship of hierarchical structures, but tipping your landlord is some next level shit.
>>
Finnegan Fluffmire - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 11:05:48 EST R9TB/QmX No.4891317 Reply
>>4891309
No shit. "Hey, I get to make money from a job as well as your job."
>>
Lass Thomas - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 11:30:23 EST jf+M45j5 No.4891331 Reply
Oh boy another thread where people who live with their parents for free don't understand how renting works.

Remember that the value in renting comes from the limitation of liability that you're buying for yourself.

Wanna not rent and buy a cheap as fuck house? Then live in the middle of nowhere like everyone else who wants raw property for cheap. Did you know you can buy government-seized houses in west virginia for as little as $10,000?
>>
Curtis Donovan - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 11:36:23 EST 5h0NnKL6 No.4891343 Reply
>>4891331
Oh boy another dude who's been middle class his entire life who doesn't understand how poverty works

~It might be too expensive to live anywhere within transit distance of a job but you can always buy a forclosed shack in appalachian coal country for more money than you've ever seen at once in your life~
>>
Lass Thomas - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 11:36:54 EST jf+M45j5 No.4891344 Reply
>>4891336

Desirable places to live cost more money? What a shocking concept.
>>
Isaac Newton - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 11:56:04 EST ePBPuvQ3 No.4891352 Reply
>>4891344
You're right, but I think that's a pretty narrow way of looking at it.
People go where employment is, at least I do and there's really little employment in West Virginia. Now I can afford rent just right, but I'm still paying far more than it's actually worth and without a massive financial investment I can't buy a property in city limits that justifies the expense.

The cycle of renting only depletes what I could be using to save for such an investment in the mean time so it becomes a situation that's very difficult to overcome.

If that money from the renting market were freed up to the commodity market, the economy would have more movement and grow without question. Rather than being tied into the hands of the landlords.

The advancement of classes is only capable through financial investment that's dependent upon allocated resources typically, or an entirely tenacious person. I'm not naive enough to think I could advance without working the system, so obviously I conform to what is necessary of me.

However, the majority of people living in a rent environment become incapable of advancement once they full fill biological needs such as children and the cycle of poverty becomes inherent.

These people, however are not insignificant and are the true foundation of society, hard working parents forced into a situation like that only to often be stunted by over inflated profit margins.

There are a few solutions to this situation, the building of high speed public transport out of city limits would give many people the option of low-cost property while being able to transport themselves to a city where they can work.

The other option is a rent-controlled environment, which is not liked by land lords because their incentive is obviously profit (that's the nature of it). If you were to simply remove the privatized status in many housing complexes and instead allocate the position of "landlord" to be more of a groundskeeper and handyman there would be a significant advancement of both the private market and the social status of most people.

There is obviously the risk of wreckless occupants who may damage their surroundings, but that's a price I think we should pay for a better society.

thanks for being the opposing opinion btw, I need criticism in my opinions
>>
Lass Thomas - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:07:34 EST jf+M45j5 No.4891362 Reply
>>4891352

>The cycle of renting only depletes what I could be using to save for such an investment
Did you not look at what the rent was before signing the lease or something?

>If that money from the renting market were freed up to the commodity market
I don't even know what you're suggesting. Or what this sentence even means.

>the majority of people living in a rent environment become incapable of advancement once they full fill biological needs such as children
So having kids irresponsibly increases your risk of putting yourself in a financial bind? Well no shit m8.

>the building of high speed public transport out of city limits would give many people the option of low-cost property while being able to transport themselves to a city where they can work
That's called arbitrage, nigga. Those "low-cost" properties won't be low cost for long.

>The other option is a rent-controlled environment
Go ask new york city how well that worked out for them in the 1970s. That's how you get billionaires living in 2000 sq ft condos but only paying $500 a month for 4 decades, then handing down the leases to their children indefinitely.

I don't know why people think landlords are raking in massive profits. I guess probably because they don't see any of the numbers past the line on their check.

Rent is a function of the local RE market. If the rent is high, then that means high skilled employment in the area is very high, and vice versa. You can charge whatever the fuck you want for rent, but that doesn't mean people will be lining up to sign leases with you. After maintenance, depreciation, and taxes, landlord margins are a whole lot thinner than people think.
>>
Isaac Newton - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 13:03:28 EST ePBPuvQ3 No.4891412 Reply
>>4891362
>Did you not look at what the rent was before signing the lease or something?
Of course you do, but there is little option in cities. Demand is incredibly high for
living accommodations so you compete to even rent in the first place. Even the lower
choices are usually high.

>I don't even know what you're suggesting. Or what this sentence even means.
How do you not understand such a simple principal? Less money on rent means more
money to purchase things... Purchasing things supports businesses and jobs.

>So having kids irresponsibly increases your risk of putting yourself in a financial bind? Well no shit m8.
You can't blame humans for propagating, even if you do that's still a new person who
will have all kinds of new needs and will be the future of society. It's important that we
help structure a future.

>That's called arbitrage, nigga. Those "low-cost" properties won't be low cost for long.
Right! But those properties will be owned (atleast for a little while) by the people who live in them.
It's temporary, but solves a generation of poverty with ownership of land.

>Go ask new york city how well that worked out for them in the 1970s. That's how you get billionaires living in 2000 sq ft condos but only paying $500 a month for 4 decades, then handing down the leases to their children indefinitely.

Good, people should have a place to live and it's good that their children do as well.

>I don't know why people think landlords are raking in massive profits. I guess probably because they don't see any of the numbers past the line on their check.

If you only look at a single instance of an apartment you may think this is true. An 8% profit on a single apartment is low, but once you get to 30 - 40 apartments, you get a solid financial footing, if you're like some people who own over 4,000 apartments you can then see something even grander.

In short, I don't understand why people DON'T think landlords rake in a massive profit, i guess probably because they don't understand the numbers past a single apartment.

>Rent is a function of the local RE market. If the rent is high, then that means high skilled employment in the area is very high, and vice versa. You can charge whatever the fuck you want for rent, but that doesn't mean people will be lining up to sign leases with you. After maintenance, depreciation, and taxes, landlord margins are a whole lot thinner than people think.

You bring up a good point on where certain housing is available, but I believe you overlook the needless costs involved in most living situations and place too must trust in the system. If you don't think prices are artificially inflated to bolster profit margins and don't understand the true feedback hierarchy of property management, it's worth looking into.

A "property management" company will buy anything they can for as little as possible, selling it out to an individual attempting to make a profit who will then rent it out to people who can afford it, until that property becomes not as profitable as it once was and the cycle continues.

Each time a property is sold in an area that has a solid need, it raises in price, this price is then factored into rent directly passing on the burden to the renter, and the property tax associated is also factored into this rent.

The bottom line is always the person renting. it is indeed more complex than a "landlord", but they are ultimately the muscle that propagates such as system of inflated prices.

Such a system is numb to criticism of people who actually need housing though, which should always be the primary concern of a system of housing. Why not cut out the middlemen?
>>
Finnegan Fluffmire - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 13:04:02 EST R9TB/QmX No.4891413 Reply
Imagine what would happen to the consumer economy if people didn't have to pay rent. Massive profits is what.
>>
Lingering Hotwaggle - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 13:16:46 EST rO+GGMpN No.4891428 Reply
>>4891412
You're very level-headed and can calmly explain to others what informs your opinions. I appreciate seeing that on this board. One thing I would like to ask you is if you think that land ownership for everyone is feasible in such a populous country as the US without completely restructuring a century's amount of work that went into the infrastructure of things like cities. Are you able to point to other examples of land ownership in other parts of the world that support your opinion? As far as I'm aware, most of Europe actually has national rental programs rather than actual land and house property for its citizens. I agree with almost all of your other points.
>>
Lass Thomas - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 13:18:27 EST jf+M45j5 No.4891431 Reply
>>4891412

>You can't blame humans for propagating
Yes you can. This isn't the 1920s. Use a fucking jimmy hat for fucks sake.

>Good, people should have a place to live and it's good that their children do as well.
So you support government handouts to billionaires. Nice.

>Bunch of other incoherent textwall
tl;dr

>Why not cut out the middlemen?
Because the middleman sometimes is desired, at least by people who are smart enough to understand the true value of renting.

If my roof leaks or my water heater explodes tomorrow, then none of that shit is my problem. If you own your place then that shit is 100% on you to fix. If you didn't have money for rent, then you REALLY aren't gonna have money to perform emergency repairs. Then what are you gonna do? Sit in your house with no hot water forever?
>>
Finnegan Fluffmire - Wed, 14 Aug 2019 13:26:39 EST R9TB/QmX No.4891438 Reply
You know what's also gross and for assholes? Adult diapers.

Report Post
Reason
Note
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.