Re: Strikes
Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2021 2:18 pm
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?
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?
1. Why should the landlord bear any responsibility for her tenants inability to pay rent?ousdahl wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 3:42 pm 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.ousdahl wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 3:42 pm 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.
Yeah, dumb to think it isn't
it can be (and probably is the majority of the time)Overlander wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 10:30 pmYeah, 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.Overlander wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 10:30 pmYeah, dumb to think it isn't
You know who thinks it isn't?
Renters
Seems we beg to differ. I don't feel in every case owning is a "real job".BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 8:04 am 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.
Some jobs are harder than others. Doesn't make them any less of a job imo.NotGutterGutter wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 8:27 amSeems we beg to differ. I don't feel in every case owning is a "real job".BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 8:04 am 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.
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".
I may not fully understand those two sentences put together.BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 8:34 amSome jobs are harder than others. Doesn't make them any less of a job imo.NotGutterGutter wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 8:27 amSeems we beg to differ. I don't feel in every case owning is a "real job".BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 8:04 am 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.
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".
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.ousdahl wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 11:20 pm 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.