Should people who have lost their job due to COVID, unable to pay rent, be evicted?

That would be MASSIVELY exploited, and also would negatively impact investment in rental properties.

 

That's crazy. Billions of First Worlders live alone or with a single family, in huge suburban houses .. and you want to destroy the planet and reason by just continuing (forever) to build more and more because we're all so damned spoiled we must have 'our own place'?

 

And you can't see ANYTHING wrong with that picture? Seriously?

 

The governments created the shutdowns that led to this economic depression.
Now it has to decide which innocent group it wants to further harm.
Tenants who want to work but can’t or landlords who did nothing wrong and face lost income from tenants.
Good job covid over reactionaries!

 

Not to mention that the influx of free dollars would cause the dollar to be worth even less, and that steals from every person who has savings.

 

Post of the week (and it's only Monday!). Could not possibly agree more.

In an aside, my personal aggravation with this is that it's invariably those who call themselves 'socialists' who demand to be feted and paid to continue their archly capitalist lifestyles.

 

How would it negatively impact investment in rental properties? And why would it necessarily be "massively" exploited?

 

Yes, but we don't pay for a ****ing plush, choice-filled, first world lifestyle (I must have my own place, and my yummies!) during a ****ing war! We pay for basic food rations and dormitories.

 

Isn't the influx of "free" dollars being matched by their withdrawal due to nobody having work anymore?

 

It's necessary to do what's necessary, not what's 'preferred'.

 

Where did they live before they started earning more on welfare?

 

You can't be for real.

MANY people have that, or more. Working class people, even. Those who've spent their lifetime living well within their means, and have thus been able to stockpile cash, or invest in property or other stable commodities. I know plenty of people on minimum wages who've done it. Just read that bold again .. because that's what's at play here. It has nothing to do with how much they earn.

 

Vote Biden and Democrats for Soviet style, Government housing...

 

No. Dollars are not being withdrawn from circulation because of "nobody having work anymore." Dollars are being added by the government beyond what would be warranted by expansion of the economy. And then supply and demand takes over. And inflation occurs. Best have that 6 to 8 months of wages invested in something that will grow and counterbalance the inflation.

 

I don't pay rent or have house payments. Should the government just send me a check instead of sending it to a landlord or a bank?

Are you suggesting getting us into a war to get us out of our financial predicament?

 

You really think the US gets its money by printing it? If that's all that has to be done to get more money then why is the US $26 trillion in debt?

 

Sorry but you are mistaken.

I have well over 8 months wages on hand. Call me a delusional liar if you wish.

The Government does not have money. The People have money. Now days the People's money is not enough to go around. If it was we would not have a National Debt. People or governments that have enough money don't have debt.

 

this is not the great depression, there are no bread lines. most of these people are lazy and expect the taxpayer to bail them out.

why don't they move to a red state where the cost of living is lower?

 

I don't see anybody saying that we should get everyone a penthouse. Some conservatives here are saying we should have them moving into empty schools ( if not empty streets).

Try to keep in mind that the landlord doesn't want an empty property either

 

The government has all the money, the government MAKES money, and they are the only ones who can legally do that. Can you print money? The National "Debt" is a legal fiction, the government could pay it all tomorrow

Governments are not people

That debt is what gives our money value.

 

You simply cannot have the massive kinds of social displacement and homelessness running throughout a country, unless you want either riots that make this spring's looking like a tupperware party, or an incredible rise in crime, or a major far left movement towards a truly anti-democratic regime or more likely all three.

The foundations of our social order will be threatened with such a massive amount of poverty hunger and homelessness. Desperate people will not wait for election results to keep their kids clothed fed and sheltered.

 

That's a hard call. I'm glad I don't have to be the one that makes it. One side of it you have people that have lost their income, on the other side you have landlords that have to pay property taxes.

That's a hard call.

 

The other side of that is to foreclose on the property nobody will buy it and people get kicked out

 

As a landlord myself, I chose other. I would like the ability to evict should the need arise. This is never the first option, and over the years of landlording, we got pretty good at working with tenants to get paid, albeit sometimes slower than preferred. In 18 years of owning rentals, only had to do 1 actual eviction.

All this said, we have been in contact with our tenants and so far all of them are still employed. We wanted to sell one of the properties this year when the lease ended in May, but with the virus, our tenant really begged us for another year, so we acquiesced and re-leased another year.

Should one of our tenants lose the ability to pay, we would want the right to evict if needed. Can't afford to maintain the property too long without rental income. In short, I don't want to lose the house because I'm forced to keep someone in there for free. I would hope that they would then qualify for aid, or I would, to keep it afloat. If that means a mortgage moratorium, then that's acceptable for as long as it lasts.

 

My two cents... If you lost your job, there were obviously options One could simply look for other work. There are large sections of the economy though that finding similar work was pretty hard, and we probably need to make some allowances for that. In other sectors of the economy, jobs were still out there. Every time I have gone through a fast food drive through, every restaurant has been hiring. Everyone of them. So, for some parts of the economy, there are jobs to be had.

The difficulty are those who chose to take the extended vacation by taking the unemployment route. I am aware of several folks who decided, even though the business owner applied and received PPP that those folks chose not to return to work because, frankly, they were banking more money taking unemployment than they had working.

I don't want anyone to loose their home or their life because of actions states, or cities took that caused their industries to have to shut down. Perhaps those states or cities should be responsible for their dictation to those industries, and shoulder the cost of their decisions. We see democrats desperately trying to fund these cities and states with federal dollars, for the amount of income taxes from those industries is now denying those states and cities. Perhaps they should have thought about that before they engaged in economic suicide.

Which still leaves lots of folks who don't have income, and who's jobs are declared unnecessary who are still going to be out of work. And we still have cities, and states who declare that their enterprises aren't necessary, even though they are not entirely causing an artificial crisis for those folks and their housing.

Democrats, this is what you've wrought. Figure out how to pay for it now.