Strikes

[TDub]

ok yeah.

but not in this instance, apparently.

so what's preventing her from actively working to fix her own economic situation, instead of sitting on her ass and passively waiting on someone else to fix it for her?

Who says she isnt? Why do you think should someone else get to live in HER house for free while shes in a car? Why are you putting that back on her and not her deadbeat tenants?

[ousdahl]

I don't mean to give a pass to deadbeat tenants. Of course they should be paying rent. Again, I'm taking the free market capitalist angle with this one.

but in a socioeconomic culture that essentially blames poor people for being poor, I'm kinda struggling with the idea of blaming poor people for their landlords being poor too. How much responsibility should the most marginalized people deserve?

How much responsibility should the landlord deserve? Cuz you kinda come across as giving her a pass.

I feel for her. But I'm also wondering if, say, she worked any other job for which the market dried up, how long we're supposed to let her sit around feeling sorry for herself before she's expected to just go find a new source of income.

The article is kinda vague about much of the situation, such as whether any of the parties involved actually work. It mentions low income, but without more specifics, $23k/3 properties is how many months of sitting around knowing your financial situation is fucked but not doing anything about it.

at the end of the day, passively relying on a bunch of deadbeats as your only source of income just doesn't seem like the most promising business model. Again, perhaps she could consider a new career path. Like, oh I dunno, maybe actively working full time like a normal adult.

She's a single mom. Maybe Leawood could offer some job ideas.

[ousdahl]

here's a question: what would happen if she simply sold off those properties?

it's a good time to sell, particularly with that major housing crash coming this winter, or sooner.

[jhawks99]

This thread was better when we were talking about chile verde.

[TDub]

I don't mean to give a pass to deadbeat tenants. Of course they should be paying rent. Again, I'm taking the free market capitalist angle with this one.

but in a socioeconomic culture that essentially blames poor people for being poor, I'm kinda struggling with the idea of blaming poor people for their landlords being poor too. How much responsibility should the most marginalized people deserve?

How much responsibility should the landlord deserve? Cuz you kinda come across as giving her a pass.

I feel for her. But I'm also wondering if, say, she worked any other job for which the market dried up, how long we're supposed to let her sit around feeling sorry for herself before she's expected to just go find a new source of income.

The article is kinda vague about much of the situation, such as whether any of the parties involved actually work. It mentions low income, but without more specifics, $23k/3 properties is how many months of sitting around knowing your financial situation is fucked but not doing anything about it.

at the end of the day, passively relying on a bunch of deadbeats as your only source of income just doesn't seem like the most promising business model. Again, perhaps she could consider a new career path. Like, oh I dunno, maybe actively working full time like a normal adult.

She's a single mom. Maybe Leawood could offer some job ideas.

1. Why should the landlord bear any responsibility for her tenants inability to pay rent?

2. Hard to sell a house with squatters

3. Its a failure allowed by the government and a failure created by the government and...its working. We're arguing about who should be responsible the tenant or landlord. While theyre both in default (and this scenario has been and will be repeating itself across the the country) Blackrock will be buying more and more. Guess who the govt is in bed with and has more to gain dealing with...the landlord, the tenant, or Blackrock?

Perhaps Little Fink? #1 investor in fossil fuels in the world. #1 investors in Weapons manufacturing (and heavily involved woth Raytheon and Halliburton etc)...

Oh, they also just happened to be hired by the Government to "clean up" after the 2008 housing market crash.


Who benefits from the government creating scenarios where both landlord and tenant get fucked?

[twocoach]

I don't mean to give a pass to deadbeat tenants. Of course they should be paying rent. Again, I'm taking the free market capitalist angle with this one.

but in a socioeconomic culture that essentially blames poor people for being poor, I'm kinda struggling with the idea of blaming poor people for their landlords being poor too. How much responsibility should the most marginalized people deserve?

How much responsibility should the landlord deserve? Cuz you kinda come across as giving her a pass.

I feel for her. But I'm also wondering if, say, she worked any other job for which the market dried up, how long we're supposed to let her sit around feeling sorry for herself before she's expected to just go find a new source of income.

The article is kinda vague about much of the situation, such as whether any of the parties involved actually work. It mentions low income, but without more specifics, $23k/3 properties is how many months of sitting around knowing your financial situation is fucked but not doing anything about it.

at the end of the day, passively relying on a bunch of deadbeats as your only source of income just doesn't seem like the most promising business model. Again, perhaps she could consider a new career path. Like, oh I dunno, maybe actively working full time like a normal adult.

She's a single mom. Maybe Leawood could offer some job ideas.

WTF? Dude, you need to go work for a small property owner. Or at least meet one and ask them a few questions about what they do with their time. There are so many dumb statements here that it is clear that you simply cannot picture the situation that small, local property owners like this are in.

Come on, man. You bitch about small, local landlords not buying property to rent to lower income people and then when you hear that this is a very risky, very challenging thing you wonder why she is "not doing anything" about the situation and should consider selling her property and getting a "real" job.

[Deleted User 863]

Fwiw, being a landlord is a "real job".

[Overlander]

Fwiw, being a landlord is a "real job".

Yeah, dumb to think it isn't

You know who thinks it isn't?

Renters

[TDub]

True

[ousdahl]

it seems much of the issue is with the gummint policy of prioritizing shelter, over making money off shelter. during a pandemic. Or the gummint failure to deliver bailouts? or simply that perhaps the policy is being taken advantage of.

there's a joke in there somewhere about how the gummint is finally bailing out the little guy, oh come on it's not like they're bailing out the banks or something

I'm hung up on landlording is passive income, and struggle to believe managing 3 low rent properties is some full time job.

but I really feel for someone who's financially devastated to the point of homelessness. over $23 grand. (where was the landlord living otherwise? why didn't she just crap out on her rent/mortgage and exploit the moratorium too?)

And the irony of the tenants too potentially facing homelessness, though no one's fretting about that. not even me! remember, I'm the free market capitalist. KCrim majority shareholder and shit.

the whole thing is a hairy mess.

yeah this thread sucks. I kinda wanna be done with it. maybe we should start a chiles thread tomorrow.

[TDub]

I think youre in over your head on this one Q.

[ousdahl]

do go on!

[TDub]

why? Why continue rammibg my head into a brick wall? Why try and discuss anything with someone who refuses to acknowledge anything other than the most recent meme as truth? Ive tried, illy has tried, PhD has tried, twocoach has tried, japhy has tried, hell...even plano has tried.

[Deleted User 89]

Fwiw, being a landlord is a "real job".

Yeah, dumb to think it isn't

You know who thinks it isn't?

Renters

it can be (and probably is the majority of the time)

such is not always the case though

[Deleted User 887]

Fwiw, being a landlord is a "real job".

Yeah, dumb to think it isn't

You know who thinks it isn't?

Renters

As you are well aware, there can be a difference between being an owner and a landlord.
Some (many?) renters seem to be not aware of that.

[Deleted User 863]

Is managing/owning a restaurant a "real job" even though you don't cook all the food or wash all the dishes? Yes, of course.

Owning an income producing property is a "real job". Always. Some jobs are harder than others.

[Deleted User 887]

Is managing/owning a restaurant a "real job" even though you don't cook all the food or wash all the dishes? Yes, of course.

Owning an income producing property is a "real job". Always. Some jobs are harder than others.

Seems we beg to differ. I don't feel in every case owning is a "real job".
Through inheritance I was the primary owner of "income producing property". Not once did I ever consider it to be a "real job". Those who my father hired to manage his properties had the "real job/s".

[Deleted User 863]

Is managing/owning a restaurant a "real job" even though you don't cook all the food or wash all the dishes? Yes, of course.

Owning an income producing property is a "real job". Always. Some jobs are harder than others.

Seems we beg to differ. I don't feel in every case owning is a "real job".
Through inheritance I was the primary owner of "income producing property". Not once did I ever consider it to be a "real job". Those who my father hired to manage his properties had the "real job/s".

Some jobs are harder than others. Doesn't make them any less of a job imo.

[Deleted User 887]

Is managing/owning a restaurant a "real job" even though you don't cook all the food or wash all the dishes? Yes, of course.

Owning an income producing property is a "real job". Always. Some jobs are harder than others.

Seems we beg to differ. I don't feel in every case owning is a "real job".
Through inheritance I was the primary owner of "income producing property". Not once did I ever consider it to be a "real job". Those who my father hired to manage his properties had the "real job/s".

Some jobs are harder than others. Doesn't make them any less of a job imo.

I may not fully understand those two sentences put together.
What I do understand is that one person might consider taking a shit and wiping their ass as being "a job" while others may not.
I didn't consider owning "income producing property" to be a job - FOR ME. I completely see and understand how/why owning "income producing property" is a job for others.
That's all. Carry on.......

[twocoach]

it seems much of the issue is with the gummint policy of prioritizing shelter, over making money off shelter. during a pandemic. Or the gummint failure to deliver bailouts? or simply that perhaps the policy is being taken advantage of.

there's a joke in there somewhere about how the gummint is finally bailing out the little guy, oh come on it's not like they're bailing out the banks or something

I'm hung up on landlording is passive income, and struggle to believe managing 3 low rent properties is some full time job.

but I really feel for someone who's financially devastated to the point of homelessness. over $23 grand. (where was the landlord living otherwise? why didn't she just crap out on her rent/mortgage and exploit the moratorium too?)

And the irony of the tenants too potentially facing homelessness, though no one's fretting about that. not even me! remember, I'm the free market capitalist. KCrim majority shareholder and shit.

the whole thing is a hairy mess.

yeah this thread sucks. I kinda wanna be done with it. maybe we should start a chiles thread tomorrow.

The government just failed to build a mechanism to deliver the allotted money to the people it was intended to go to. Just poor planning at the procedural level.