Does unregulated renting destroys the economy?

[Anonymous No.15243177]

Do unregulated renting destroys the economy?

It seems that rent cause a massive strain on the economy and such up all the growth by causing essentially taxation.

Any time workers get a raise, the landlords raise the rents to get the money for themselves.

Any time bussinesses create more value, the landlors raise their rents, to get as much share as possible.

This causes an endless cycle where everything gets more and more expensive so that businesses can pay their rents, people asking for higher and higher wages to pay their rents and buy the even more expensive goods and services, while all the extra money ends up in landlords' pockets, who don't need to create any extra value to justify the increased rents.

Creating more real estate is often not possible and the owners are often perfectly happy to leave buildings empty so that they can keep the rents high.

This is eventually followed by people leaving the city as it is no longer profitable to stay in the city and the city's real estate market collapses as everybody goes either bankrupt or moves elsewhere.

Is there a solution to this problem? How could we create real estate market which is not prone to price gouging and bubbles?

[Anonymous No.15243186]

Seems like you corrected your
>Do unregulated renting destroys...
Still go fuck yourself pajeet socialist and prepare to be slaughtered

[Anonymous No.15243197]

>how?
debt free money

[Anonymous No.15243232]

>>15243177
How is that a problem? You just have to buy low and sell high. No one forces you to take a bad deal

[Anonymous No.15243261]

>>15243197
>debt free money
What's that?
>>15243232
You need a place to live and run your business. You still need to pay the increased rents the busnisses must pay in the prices of their goods and services.

[Anonymous No.15243287]

Just fuck off, go conduct your focus group somewhere else socialist

[Anonymous No.15243305]

Buy SENT

[Anonymous No.15243319]

>>15243261
And you have many options in cities or suburbs with different characteristics. If the trend is the same across all of them, that's how much it's worth, no one is scamming you.

[Anonymous No.15243325]

No. It functions no different than any other sector of the economy. It's profit levels are on average about the same. There's no landlord cabal. House prices go up at roughly equivalent, so there's no rent gouging.

The universal you are looking for is Georgism. If there's an issue with the land sector, it has nothing to do with rent [you could make the same argument regarding people "raising" interest rates to exploit profitable businesses], it has to do with the ownership of land itself.

I'm not a Georgist myself, but at least adopt a position that requires thought to refute.

[Anonymous No.15243340]

>>15243177
>This is eventually followed by people leaving the city as it is no longer profitable to stay in the city and the city's real estate market collapses as everybody goes either bankrupt or moves elsewhere.
Citation needed

[Anonymous No.15243349]

>>15243340
The same citation that if you don't keep making fraudulent bank notes people will hold their gold into a deflationary spiral and the entire world will collapse because it's better to hold than to spend.

I.E. no empirical source ever, just thought backed by nothing. Fiat thought

[Anonymous No.15243360]

>>15243325
This. Landlords actually take on a lot of risk and many lose money rather than making it. Once you buy the top (in terms of quality of neighborhood) and then it gets worse, jobs, business and people leave your area you're probably stuck forever and will never make a profit.

[Anonymous No.15243387]

>>15243360
Well, so far most landlords in cities have made seniorage profits on credit expansion due to lowered interest rates and the general worldwide expansion of a credit worthy middle class.

[Anonymous No.15243394]

OP you are right to some degree but the outrageous rent/housing costs are due to a number of factors including:
building of homes not increasing as fast as people needing homes
unbridled immigration creating more contest for homes, contributing to the first issue
if you are in Canada, Australia or NZ, Chinese hot-money buying up land due to the fear of PRC further restricting the flow of money

[Anonymous No.15243402]

>>15243387
>somebody made profits
>I want those profits RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Grab a gun and get them. oops the state you socialist scum infiltrated lacks the human resources and means to grab those profits because you disarmed your own storm troopers. ooops. Now go kys and keep eating avocados and grain, become fat and don't move too much, nobody wants to eat chewy meat

[Anonymous No.15243409]

>>15243177
The culprit are fiat money and mass immigration.
If you have a stable population and stable money then everything else becomes either stable or cheaper over time.

We are currently in an everything bubble because the fed and banks keep artificially stimulating the economy by creating debt (which future generations have no way to repay btw).

[Anonymous No.15243421]

>>15243409
future generations are not even touching the assets and commodities that debt has been hidden in. Boomers and banks will keep sitting on that debt be it in property, industries, boomer rocks and what not. And if future generation don't take the torch and just ignore the institutions that are depend on the (((generational contract))) they die

[Anonymous No.15243430]

>>15243177
>How could we create real estate market which is not prone to price gouging and bubbles?
Just wait for boomers to die

[Anonymous No.15243482]

>>15243177
Price is determined by supply and demand, genius.

[Anonymous No.15243519]

>>15243387
That's true, but it has very little application to an individual landlord as such. Just capital and land holders successful at predicting business cycles.
To a degree, lower interest rates hurt the landlord vis-a-vis the homeowner. Credit expansion generally causes mortgage bubbles, which means people shifting from renting to home ownership. This is a particular manifestation of the fact that lower interest rates means lower rent, since the majority of rent is nothing more than interest rate on the house. Insofar as he is a provider of present goods in exchange for future goods, he is in direct competition with the central bank which can create fraudulent future goods at zero cost.

[Anonymous No.15243527]

>>15243287
Based and redpilled.

[Anonymous No.15243533]

>>15243177
So? Do you work and find housing with good prospects. My house was cheap and has increased by 50k in 3 years because i spent time looking at the area, the demographics, future development etc.

I eventually plan to save to be able to rent it out and ill have lazy morons like you saying it's unfair i have the house.

[Anonymous No.15243553]

>>15243177
Yes it is I refuse to move out my parents to pay 70% of my wages to so flashy paki landlord

Cons social life is in the pits

[Anonymous No.15243555]

>>15243349
>Fiat thought
kek

[Anonymous No.15243558]

>>15243177
No, regulated renting does. Look at any place with rent controls dumbfuck.

[Anonymous No.15243574]

>>15243558
This. However all that happens is brain dead college socialists advocate for countless regulations on the market. It then collapses the market and they double down claiming the collapse is due to inherent flaws in capitalist markets. The argument will never end so long as their gene line persists.

[Anonymous No.15243584]

>>15243558
Yup, rent controls = you cant even get a place to live even if you were willing to pay more.

[Anonymous No.15243596]

>>15243325
>There's no landlord cabal. House prices go up at roughly equivalent, so there's no rent gouging.
The prices are determined by the same landlords who demand exorbitant rents.
>>15243394
>>15243409
It isn't immigrants, but people who buy houses "as an investment", without actually physically moving. A major part of new buildings is bought by people who don't plan to ever live in them.
>>15243360
>>15243402
It isn't about the profits, it's about the strain to the economy and the boom-bust cycle it creates.
>>15243527
It's very likely the price will crash before you retire.
>I eventually plan to save to be able to rent it out and ill have lazy morons like you saying it's unfair i have the house.
You essentially plan to live off other people's money. That makes you lazy.

[Anonymous No.15243599]

>>15243584
At least if you are white. Muhammed and abdul get the best.

[Anonymous No.15243610]

>>15243596
Im lazy because I work with a plan to eventually be able to work less?

Okay, i assume therefore you work as a ploughman on fields? Of course its not the most sensible job but it's the hardest work and you aren't lazy are you?

[Anonymous No.15243616]

>>15243596
>The prices are determined by the same landlords who demand exorbitant rents.

Prices are not determined by landlords. Read a fucking book. Tired of you retards thinking you know fucking anything about this incredibly deep subject. Go infiltrate a university and start lecturing physicists about your cool intuitive physics theories retard.

[Anonymous No.15243622]

>>15243177
>don't need to create any extra value to justify the increased rents

This is why we require people to cite their sources because people just make shit up that they think is true. Rentals are competitive and in good markets do renovate frequently to justify higher price.You would know that if you did any research outside of cobbling together anecdotal evidence you've encountered in your life.

[Anonymous No.15243634]

>>15243622
No, there's no difference between a £12000 a month 6 bedroom rental and a council flat my sixth form english teacher said so and she's very smart.

[Anonymous No.15243640]

>>15243596
Socialism/statism is the laziest thinking on the planet
>Calls others lazy

[Anonymous No.15243641]

>>15243596
>I believe in adhoc theories
>look at my phd in religious science I mean economics
Idiot. The first to be culled will be the priests of the old regime, means students and academics who preached (((soft science))) and tried to sell it as the one and only truth.

It is over your propagandists failed. If not enough people believe you, you lack the trust to reach a critical mass to make an idea hegemonic.

[Anonymous No.15243646]

>>15243177
Major cities are a meme, high rent encourages people and businesses to move out of major cities and develop smaller cities and rural areas, thus boosting the economy of those areas, anyone who lives in Jew York or NorCal and earns less than six figures is absolutely fucking retarded and deserves to get cucked by rent prices

[Anonymous No.15243656]

>>15243622
And if demand is bigger than supply, increasing prices lead to new construction.

[Anonymous No.15243658]

>>15243641
He doesn't have a thought in Economics, let alone a doctorate.

[Anonymous No.15243664]

>>15243177
I can see a regulated rent might be a good thing, it will cut down incentive from boomer from hording. I don’t see any negative to this.

[Anonymous No.15243684]

>>15243646
> "NO YOU CAN'T JUST MAKE ME LIVE OUTSIDE OF THE GENTRIFIED CITY CENTRES WHERE ALL THE MUST EAT LEBANESE-FAROE ISLAND FUSION CAFÉS ARE"

[Anonymous No.15243688]

>>15243610
You plant to live off other people's work.
>>15243616
Landlords own the houses and determine thier price.
>>15243656
The new construction is also bought out, either to rent, or to "invest" and keep increasing in price. This continues until the market crashes.

[Anonymous No.15243692]

>>15243658
Yeah, he is part of a loud minority of true believers in a failed ideology that has multiple times been proven ineffective an inefficient. Nevertheless, there is currently no economic theory that has enough followers to be hegemonic. The spenglerist winter is here, if you hold an academic degree in soft science, hide or die.

[Anonymous No.15243693]

>>15243688
So you literally have no counter argument. Jesus how arrogant are you for so little experience and knowledge.

[Anonymous No.15243697]

>>15243688
Landlords determine the amount for which they are willing to rent. That does not determine prices.

Tell me: why don't landlords determine that rents are ten billion dollars per month per square meter?

[Anonymous No.15243698]

>>15243640
You called me lazy first. For not being willing to plan how to live off other people's money.

[Anonymous No.15243705]

>>15243688
Prices are determined by supply and demand. Both buyers and sellers have a say in the price. You should really read some econ 101 book.

[Anonymous No.15243707]

>>15243688
>The new construction is also bought out, either to rent, or to "invest" and keep increasing in price. This continues until the market crashes.

So you're saying that these evil people just give all of their wealth away buying useless construction sites and then lose everything?

Damn...

[Anonymous No.15243713]

>>15243688
Landlords dont keep rentals empty, they lower the price if they have to, to get profits, retard.

[Anonymous No.15243714]

>>15243697
He doesn't understand economics to even a teenager level. He'd also likely set minimum wage at $5,000 an hour so we can all be millionaires.

[Anonymous No.15243743]

>>15243640
Sorry, clicked the wrong post, it was meant to somebody who called me lazy for not being willing to planhow to live off othe people's money.
>>15243693
I don't see any argument that you made.
>>15243697
They also determine the price for which they are willing to sell. That does determine the price.

They charge as much as somebody people are able to pay. Nobody can pay ten billion dollars per month, so they cannot ask that. If somebody could, they would.

>>15243705
You either buy or don't buy. SInce there is enough landlords who follow the "buy anything that is priced below average" rule, you basically have to accept the price as it won't decrease until far after it was obvious the market is unsustainable.
>>15243707
Well, the developers say so, and I have no reason to believe it isn't true. It's just the shotsighted belief that the prices will rise forever and the bubble never gets popped.

[Anonymous No.15243748]

>>15243713
Not they don't. They rather keep the bulding half empty, because they believe that lowering rents would decrease the house's value.

[Anonymous No.15243754]

>>15243713
No they don't. They rather keep the bulding half empty, because they believe that lowering rents would decrease the house's value.

[Anonymous No.15243772]

>>15243743
Then reread my posts. You have no coherent reasoning behind what counts as lazy work or hard work or why one is better than the other.

[Anonymous No.15243784]

>>15243748
Landlords need to make interest payments to banks so they need the cash flow. They are 100% willing to lower rent to get cash flow. You wouldn't make a very good landlord. Keep being a wagie till you die.

[Anonymous No.15243786]

>>15243754
No landlord keeps his properties empty for long. If no-one is willing to pay the rent the rental price drops. I honestly cannot conceive of how you think the system can work otherwise. These people just starve to death because they're so committed to a hypothetical value?

[Anonymous No.15243791]

>>15243743
>They charge as much as somebody people are able to pay.

Under your logic, then, we can prove that consumers determine the price:

Consumers determine the price, since they determine the price for which they are willing to buy.
They pay as little as landlords are able to offer.


There is no sole determinate of price. Saying that x determines y in Economics is nonsense. The word you are looking for is "influence".

>Well, the developers say so, and I have no reason to believe it isn't true
Of course landlords buy houses from developers. That wasn't your point. Your point was that landlords systematically buy houses from developers are prices above the level at which they would have been sold if the manipulation of the landlord were not present. Which means that you are arguing that landlords systematically buy loss-bearing assets in order to keep up short term rent.
Bear in mind that these landlords will be draining their entire asset liquidity on assets which they cannot even derive a profit yield from, for they cannot sell nor rent the item without influencing price.
This means that their profit level is actually going to be below that of people in other sectors - because you can consider the houses which they are buying (with their seemingly infinite money?) as part of the cost necessary to charge higher rents.
You realize that in order to charge 50 dollars higher rent on one hundred properties you would have to buy out one hundred other properties and remove them from the market, right?
How could this possibly be more profitable than buying out those 50 houses and reintroducing them to the market?

I could go on forever. Please read about the subject about which you are attempting to talk.

[Anonymous No.15243800]

This OP may be the stupidest poster i have ever seen visit /biz/. It's actually depressing.

[Anonymous No.15244779]

>>15243772
You started people calling lazy, I called you out on it.
>>15243786
I assure that many landlords are perfectly happy keeping the building half empty if they cannot rent it. The reasoing is that the loss from the rent is lower than the loss of the property's value. Yes, it's irrational, but they do it.
>>15243791
Customers ar nto the ones who determine the price, they need a place to live/conduct business, the landlord doesn't.
>>15243791
Developers don't have any reason to ask for less. It isn't necessary by landlords for rent, it's often bought by somewhat wealthy people solely with the belief that the house will keep increasing in value. It won't, people will lose money on that. But people do it. But landlords do start the cycle by charging higher and higher rent and paying more and more for existing houses.

No idea where your math is coming from.

[Anonymous No.15244788]

>>15243177
kill all the jews for example

[Anonymous No.15244875]

>>15243177
People who own property have insurance that increases with price of their house, money goes to insurance companies that get statistical edges of profit, nothing outrageous.

People who own property have taxes which go to government employees never makes anyone rich.

Rent goes to maintenance of the property ie people in trades.

Yes it's not a full proof system. People lose paid off houses all the time, you have to be on top of everything to make it work and if you don't have enough money coming in it could be the end.

I imagine our system will infinitely scale, just get more expensive in time and has to do with population growth.

[Anonymous No.15245081]

>>15243177
land ownership should be banned. it's literally destroying the environment. they clear cut thousands of acres of forest in the US every year to build sprawling cookie cutter suburbs. It's not sustainable but the developers Don't care. America will be raped and sucked dry of all it's land and resources and then discarded by the capitalists as they jet off to their private islands. Only regular poor people will be left to live in the mess they left behind.

[Anonymous No.15245109]

Unregulated renting doesn't destroy the economy, the combination of the following destroys the economy:

>Jacked up transportation costs
>Relocation of jobs from the interior of the country to the coasts or abroad
>Housing asset bubble

Rents being sky high is the symptom, not the disease.