Long slender neck wrote: ↑Fri Oct 25, 2024 9:07 pm
What money in a bank? A tenant is paying your mortgage, of course thats profitable.
What exactly do you think will happen when Labour tax landlords out of the market. What exactly do you think Labour will do for you. Is it just that you want others to squirm and suffer. They will do the same for you as the Conservatives did for you. Nothing. In five years they will be gone. There are plenty of people who want to rent. It’s common in Europe. I don’t force anyone to rent . I give someone the option. They don’t complain . I don’t increase rent if it’s not necessary.
By buying a property you don’t need, you have stopped someone else from doing so. You have also added to the demand so forced prices up.
If this correction to the housing market is played out over the coming decade, it could spell the end of the proliferation of HMOs. Many of which are unregulated. Should that happen, then the true scale and impact of immigration may become brutally clear.
Anyone thinking there are simple fixes is not appreciating the extent to which things are broken.
Long slender neck wrote: ↑Fri Oct 25, 2024 9:07 pm
What money in a bank? A tenant is paying your mortgage, of course thats profitable.
What exactly do you think will happen when Labour tax landlords out of the market. What exactly do you think Labour will do for you. Is it just that you want others to squirm and suffer. They will do the same for you as the Conservatives did for you. Nothing. In five years they will be gone. There are plenty of people who want to rent. It’s common in Europe. I don’t force anyone to rent . I give someone the option. They don’t complain . I don’t increase rent if it’s not necessary.
By buying a property you don’t need, you have stopped someone else from doing so. You have also added to the demand so forced prices up.
So yes, you are forcing people to rent.
If George has a property to rent, and he's a good landlord, what's the issue? The fact is a rental sector needs to exist - people need and choose short term accomodation for a variety of reasons. If George sells his property and I buy it, the total number of properties is still the same. We need to build more houses, and the money from selling on council properties has to be ringfenced for more property. There's plenty can be done but driving out good landlords isn't going to end well.
The issue ultimately is that your take there doesn’t reflect the reality. The rental market isn’t there as a cheap or similar priced alternative to buying for those who want the flexibility and the short term planning that rental allows - the rental market consists of a very very high number of working people who would like to own their home but for whom the opportunity isn’t open to them because of the barriers that exist to home ownership.
If you’re pretending that the rental market is nothing more than a happy convenience for those who wouldn’t want to buy anyway, you’re deluding yourself.
What tripe. A lot of landlords are working class citizens who have actually made a huge contribution to the housing market in the a sense of any natiobb no al strategy to provide decent social housing. It is a heavily taxed and regulated market and certainly not dominated by parasites.
They might be working class but being an amateur landlord isnt 'working'. Its not taxed or regulated enough and its massively profitable.
Absolute tripe. I am a landlord. A good one. It’s is not a profitable. I pay income tax on the income and I pay for the upkeep of the property. I could make more on interest on the money in a bank. It’s an idiotic belief from an idiotic Labour idealist.
George, of course its profitable otherwise you would not do it. You may not make much money on the annual rental but the capital appreciation on the property will make you or your inheritors a better return than leaving the money in the bank. In a great many situations (possibly yours too), you did not have the money to buy the property in the first place. Its mortgaged in many instances and the tenant is usually paying the mortgage - plus some.
Long slender neck wrote: ↑Fri Oct 25, 2024 6:23 pm
They might be working class but being an amateur landlord isnt 'working'. Its not taxed or regulated enough and its massively profitable.
Absolute tripe. I am a landlord. A good one. It’s is not a profitable. I pay income tax on the income and I pay for the upkeep of the property. I could make more on interest on the money in a bank. It’s an idiotic belief from an idiotic Labour idealist.
George, of course its profitable otherwise you would not do it. You may not make much money on the annual rental but the capital appreciation on the property will make you or your inheritors a better return than leaving the money in the bank. In a great many situations (possibly yours too), you did not have the money to buy the property in the first place. Its mortgaged in many instances and the tenant is usually paying the mortgage - plus some.
To be clear , in my case I paid more into the property than I borrowed.
What tripe. A lot of landlords are working class citizens who have actually made a huge contribution to the housing market in the a sense of any natiobb no al strategy to provide decent social housing. It is a heavily taxed and regulated market and certainly not dominated by parasites.
They might be working class but being an amateur landlord isnt 'working'. Its not taxed or regulated enough and its massively profitable.
Absolute tripe. I am a landlord. A good one. It’s is not a profitable. I pay income tax on the income and I pay for the upkeep of the property. I could make more on interest on the money in a bank. It’s an idiotic belief from an idiotic Labour idealist.
No you’re not. You’re hoarding a property that someone else could own, to pay off your own mortgage.
Long slender neck wrote: ↑Fri Oct 25, 2024 3:58 pm
I guess what Sir Kier is saying is that parasites taking money from assets like a rental property isnt real work. And he's right.
What tripe. A lot of landlords are working class citizens who have actually made a huge contribution to the housing market in the a sense of any natiobb no al strategy to provide decent social housing. It is a heavily taxed and regulated market and certainly not dominated by parasites.
I have a contrary opinion of landlords. They are a detriment to the housing market; who lower standards in order to maximise profits and overlook anything other then basic service provision. Its a generalisation on the sector I know - but most landlords would not live in the maintained quality of property they have tenanted.
Some of the worse Landlords are Housing Associations. I have had a problem with my neighbouring house split into two flats both owned by a large Housing Association, been going on two years. Have my MP acting on my behalf. Their drain is full of cement which is causing damp issues. The council are acting on my behalf also and say the despair at the casual attitude. They have served notices on them to sort it but a slow process.
CEB2ElectricBoogaloo wrote: ↑Sat Oct 26, 2024 11:04 am
The issue ultimately is that your take there doesn’t reflect the reality. The rental market isn’t there as a cheap or similar priced alternative to buying for those who want the flexibility and the short term planning that rental allows - the rental market consists of a very very high number of working people who would like to own their home but for whom the opportunity isn’t open to them because of the barriers that exist to home ownership.
If you’re pretending that the rental market is nothing more than a happy convenience for those who wouldn’t want to buy anyway, you’re deluding yourself.
I'm not disagreeing with the entirety of what you said, it's more nuanced. There are barriers to home ownership, but it's not simply the existence of the rental market that is the issue - which I am saying for at least a quarter of people is a "good" thing.
I'd guess the main barrier is affordability. Do you think if there was no rental market that properties would become more affordable?
Besides, I’d take issue with what you interpret from those who rent by choice.
People who rent by choice because although they can afford to buy, renting suits them more at the moment are, by definition, people who are confident enough that they can eventually buy that they are able to throw money on renting while it’s compatible with the lifestyle. That’s fine for them, and i don’t think anyone is suggesting that those who actually want to rent should not be able to do so.
The point is that the rental market doesn’t actually exist as a meaningful “choice” that can be weighed up by the average person against home ownership: the rental market is so big only because of the constructed barriers to home ownership
CEB2ElectricBoogaloo wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2024 9:21 am
You’re not disagreeing with the entirety. What exactly are you disagreeing with, because your post isn’t taking issue with anything I actually said
Absolute tripe. I am a landlord. A good one. It’s is not a profitable. I pay income tax on the income and I pay for the upkeep of the property. I could make more on interest on the money in a bank. It’s an idiotic belief from an idiotic Labour idealist.
George, of course its profitable otherwise you would not do it. You may not make much money on the annual rental but the capital appreciation on the property will make you or your inheritors a better return than leaving the money in the bank. In a great many situations (possibly yours too), you did not have the money to buy the property in the first place. Its mortgaged in many instances and the tenant is usually paying the mortgage - plus some.
To be clear , in my case I paid more into the property than I borrowed.
o-no wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2024 8:34 am
Do you think if there was no rental market that properties would become more affordable?
Where has anybody suggested that there should be “no rental market”? What an absurd non sequitur.
Regardless, if there was no rental market, demand for property would fall causing the price of property to fall. So the answer to the question is yes.
Well yeah, but I don’t think that anyone has said that there shouldn’t be a rental market anyway.
It does make me chuckle seeing landlords genuinely try to argue that they are doing some sort of public duty and that they are “providing” housing. I can’t tell if those who make this argument are trying to fool others or if they have deluded themselves into actually thinking it’s true.
What’s even more laughable is that the same people who give it “well if you can’t afford a house give up the coffee and avocado” are the same ones who lose their minds when they think that legislation coming in is going to dent their rental profits. Weird how the logic of “well if you can’t afford to make as much money as you want being a landlord then you should give it up” doesn’t seem to apply.
