Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 1 hour later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,321,185
It's cheaper to simply hoard the land and never build houses on it or use it in any meaningful way because if they were to build anything the property taxes would go up. This is why we should implement the land value tax, also known as the single tax. Bill gates would stop hoarding land overnight and people who want to build housing would not be disincentivized
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 56 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,321,232
@1,321,228 (A)
it is true that there are infact bad landlords, but it is primarily the semitic flavors of landlords that earn the stereotype. however, most of the blame in the relationship goes to the rentoids, for they overwhelmingly are the ones to violate the contracts they willingly sign because their too irresponsible to buy a house or stay in their parents house intil they get their shit together.
Anonymous D replied with this 1 year ago, 25 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,321,243
@1,321,228 (A)
I knew a young couple who worked for decades saving up enough capital to buy a string of rental properties. While they were able to retire in their late 40s, they still maintain their homes and apartments in good condition and pay all of their taxes like clockwork. They're certainly not leeches and nobody begrudges them their success in life.
Anonymous F replied with this 1 year ago, 7 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,321,246
@1,321,243 (D)
There are people working 40-50 hours weeks that can't buy a home, and they bought a string of properties by the age of 40?
A middle class couple that is lucky enough to escape the rental trap will typically buy in their 30s, which means their one house is paid off by the time they are in their 60s.
If you have multiple properties by the age of 40 you were born into wealth.
Anonymous D replied with this 1 year ago, 3 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,321,250
@1,321,244 (A)
They worked for decades to get where they are. They've paid taxes all their lives. They maintain their dwellings at no cost to the tenants. They contributed to both the economy and society during their working years and continue to do so now as retirees.
Anonymous D replied with this 1 year ago, 12 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,321,255
@1,321,246 (F) > If you have multiple properties by the age of 40 you were born into wealth.
No, they were not. I know these people and I know how they scrimped and saved and invested wisely. For whatever reasons, they never had children and were both willing to take financial risks which paid off over time.
> A middle class couple that is lucky enough to escape the rental trap will typically buy in their 30s, which means their one house is paid off by the time they are in their 60s.
In the present day, yes. But they started early with a singular goal in mind, working long hours and pouring all of their resources into amassing the necessary capital - at a time when it was still possible for ordinary people to make good.
> they bought a string of properties by the age of 40?
They owned a string of properties by their mid 40s.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 1 year ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,321,256
@previous (D)
lol no normal person can "scrimp and save" up millions of dollars cash, which is what it would take to buy "a string of properties." Either they had generation wealth or they had super high-paying jobs.
Anonymous F replied with this 1 year ago, 27 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,321,258
@1,321,255 (D)
Like you said, it's about when they started their careers.
Why should younger generations accept a system that will never allow them that same opportunity?
The economy should reward hard work, regardless of the year you were born. When it doesn't, people will see more value in redistributing wealth or resetting the system.
If those opportunities still existed, it would all seem more legitimate and there would be less animosity towards land owners.
Anonymous D double-posted this 1 year ago, 9 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,321,262
@1,321,258 (F) > The economy should reward hard work, regardless of the year you were born.
I agree, it should. However, I don't believe that my friends should have their capital "redistributed" after working so hard, paying their taxes and making so many sacrifices. They've earned their reward, the same way that my Mother earned her home, her old age pension and numerous state-sanctioned retirement benefits.