Landlords proving once again they are the milk of human kindness.
Rent is supply and demand.
Landlords often use the concept of ‘demand’ misleadingly, since buy-to-let has become seen as a socially acceptable investment rather than an unethical error of the market, landlord lobbying groups have conflated the idea of ‘demand for somewhere to live’ with ‘demand for somewhere to rent’…using (generally leveraged) capital to outbid someone to buy a first home, then charging that person more in rent than the monthly mortgage would have been, _then_ claiming that that person being priced out of the market by _quite-fucking-literally-rent-seeking-behaviour_ is evidence of ‘demand’ for rental properties.
However, this article is equally full of shit. The price of rent on new tenancies is, by default, supply and demand. That’s how the choice is made….why the hell should a Landlord rent to Mr Smith at £500 when Mr Brown is offering £600? Is Mr Smith getting on his knees and asking nicely? Supply and demand is how the choice is made.
It has *never* been about the costs of the mortgages.
The rise in rates has only really affected landlords who bought in the last few years anyway – old landlords, even with mortgages are generally getting the same rent as the new landlords, but with much smaller mortgages that are able to be covered by the rent anyway.
It’s **always** been about extracting a profit.
So what… once you own the home you should never raise rents?
Landlord bashing again. When will you nutters realise they don’t provide a public service? Properties are an investment to make a profit. If that profit takes on luxury holidays or buys them some sort of upmarket lifestyle so be it.
Shelter should be a human right, it’s like we stopped dreaming what our taxes could accomplish since the 1940s.
Now we get excited about things like a “new bridge”. Did we lose a war? Is our capacity for industrial action this crap?
Obviously we should just do away with land lords completely and have all rentable places administered to and created by the state, with the option to buy after a certain tenure.
U.K. population increases by 3.9million in last decade and people are surprised we’re in this situation
Workers getting a pay cut (rent going up, disposable income going down), and the landlords (landowners) getting a pay rise.
What a wonderful system we’ve created.
Well yeah, housing is a captive market. It’s not something you can choose not to have, you need it. Free market principals fall apart because the market can’t choose to walk away of they don’t like the product for the price, because that would result in them being homeless.
Housing should not be some rich folks private enterprise.
Yet people rent for that price. And they expect it to change. <Insert excuse to why I rent here>.
Overheard a customer in their kitchen having a business meeting. 3 of them putting money in a pot and buying properties to let, trying to figure out the return on investment. One says “…is it LEGAL to put the rent up 17% every year? ”
They have ample money each, this is purely about making money and are completely disconnected from the living, breathing and probably struggling human being on the end of it.
Really horrible to hear that.
Landlords do get a bad reputation, and I’d agree for the most part.
But I’d like to say I had nothing but the best from my landlady when I was renting a few years back. £800 a month for almost 3 years, never went up.
And Christmas she charged me £250 instead of £800 as a gift.
I feel for anybody who’s renting from any of the cunts reported in the article.
In “wealth of Nations” Adam smith explains exactly why this happens and that was in 1776 so I can’t say I’m surprised it still holds true.
Inflation exists, therefore a static rent is in effect a rent decrease.
This is what I don’t get, particularly around the time of lockdown where people were losing jobs and struggling to pay rent but there was an eviction moratorium. Someone, somewhere, owns the property. Whether it’s a landlord or their mortgage provider or the fund that backs the bank or whatever, at the bottom of the pile there is someone who has a piece of paper with the address and their name on it and does not have to pay to own it. Why not pay off that person for the pittance it costs to actually sustain a human and freeze the whole chain of misery?
Rather poor reporting.
I don’t think we should expect rent to be static when the price of everything else is increasing. Even a mortgage-free landlord has costs they need to cover, such as maintenance and insurance, which will have increased.
The question should be whether the rises are in line with costs (which is surely fair) or whether landlords are gouging for the sake of it (which is abhorrent). There’s a big moral difference there.
Landlords are 110% parasites.
​
I won’t hear anything else.
The Guardian finally workout what an investment is. Given the readership I thought they would have worked that out sooner!
It’s not cashing in. It’s free market economics. Should they just be charitable.
Whether a landlord has a mortgage or not is completely irrelevant.
r/georgism
r/JustTaxLand
Consider the discussion on those and similar subreddits – better that that than hoping for hope from an ineffectual Labour party who, at their best might bring in rent controls, raising housing benefit or comparable policies which over the not very long term will become counterproductive.
Food is a greater need than shelter.
When I go to the supermarket at 9 pm in the discount section I can see a ready meal discounted from £4 to £1.60. Right behind me is the supermarket worker with a bin bag, ready to throw it away. They will not reduce it further. They will lock their bins so people can’t even fish it out of the bin. They literally would rather throw away a basic necessity rather than giving it to me for profit.
This is done for literally everything, food, drink, clothes, electronics, books.
Yet somehow all the commies in the comments think it’s the landlords who are the problem here.
No. Just increase the supply of homes to buy and rent. If you keep fucking with landlords the rents will just keep rising….
The higher rents are determined by market forces not whether or not the landlord has an ‘excuse’. Daft article.
The market rate is higher why the hell wouldn’t they?
This is just the headlines for the sake of headlines, landlords obviously are not there to provide affordable social housing, they are businesses through and through. Stop hating the players and hate the game. The government of lack of social housing, no homes being built, high emigration, allowing cheap credit, selling off council properties, crap legislation for renters rights, no strict policies or taxes for multi property owners, no policies for empty houses, no restriction from foreign buyers etc has all led to this
Indeed- sadly, had interest rates not flatlined after 2008, reflecting idiotic Monetary Policy of 1997/98, and the Magic Money Tree of QE not been raided, savers would not have been unlikely to have reallocated cash into property based investments. But, pension fund trustees also followed the herd.
26 comments
Landlords proving once again they are the milk of human kindness.
Rent is supply and demand.
Landlords often use the concept of ‘demand’ misleadingly, since buy-to-let has become seen as a socially acceptable investment rather than an unethical error of the market, landlord lobbying groups have conflated the idea of ‘demand for somewhere to live’ with ‘demand for somewhere to rent’…using (generally leveraged) capital to outbid someone to buy a first home, then charging that person more in rent than the monthly mortgage would have been, _then_ claiming that that person being priced out of the market by _quite-fucking-literally-rent-seeking-behaviour_ is evidence of ‘demand’ for rental properties.
However, this article is equally full of shit. The price of rent on new tenancies is, by default, supply and demand. That’s how the choice is made….why the hell should a Landlord rent to Mr Smith at £500 when Mr Brown is offering £600? Is Mr Smith getting on his knees and asking nicely? Supply and demand is how the choice is made.
It has *never* been about the costs of the mortgages.
The rise in rates has only really affected landlords who bought in the last few years anyway – old landlords, even with mortgages are generally getting the same rent as the new landlords, but with much smaller mortgages that are able to be covered by the rent anyway.
It’s **always** been about extracting a profit.
So what… once you own the home you should never raise rents?
Landlord bashing again. When will you nutters realise they don’t provide a public service? Properties are an investment to make a profit. If that profit takes on luxury holidays or buys them some sort of upmarket lifestyle so be it.
Shelter should be a human right, it’s like we stopped dreaming what our taxes could accomplish since the 1940s.
Now we get excited about things like a “new bridge”. Did we lose a war? Is our capacity for industrial action this crap?
Obviously we should just do away with land lords completely and have all rentable places administered to and created by the state, with the option to buy after a certain tenure.
U.K. population increases by 3.9million in last decade and people are surprised we’re in this situation
Workers getting a pay cut (rent going up, disposable income going down), and the landlords (landowners) getting a pay rise.
What a wonderful system we’ve created.
Well yeah, housing is a captive market. It’s not something you can choose not to have, you need it. Free market principals fall apart because the market can’t choose to walk away of they don’t like the product for the price, because that would result in them being homeless.
Housing should not be some rich folks private enterprise.
Yet people rent for that price. And they expect it to change. <Insert excuse to why I rent here>.
Overheard a customer in their kitchen having a business meeting. 3 of them putting money in a pot and buying properties to let, trying to figure out the return on investment. One says “…is it LEGAL to put the rent up 17% every year? ”
They have ample money each, this is purely about making money and are completely disconnected from the living, breathing and probably struggling human being on the end of it.
Really horrible to hear that.
Landlords do get a bad reputation, and I’d agree for the most part.
But I’d like to say I had nothing but the best from my landlady when I was renting a few years back. £800 a month for almost 3 years, never went up.
And Christmas she charged me £250 instead of £800 as a gift.
I feel for anybody who’s renting from any of the cunts reported in the article.
In “wealth of Nations” Adam smith explains exactly why this happens and that was in 1776 so I can’t say I’m surprised it still holds true.
Inflation exists, therefore a static rent is in effect a rent decrease.
This is what I don’t get, particularly around the time of lockdown where people were losing jobs and struggling to pay rent but there was an eviction moratorium. Someone, somewhere, owns the property. Whether it’s a landlord or their mortgage provider or the fund that backs the bank or whatever, at the bottom of the pile there is someone who has a piece of paper with the address and their name on it and does not have to pay to own it. Why not pay off that person for the pittance it costs to actually sustain a human and freeze the whole chain of misery?
Rather poor reporting.
I don’t think we should expect rent to be static when the price of everything else is increasing. Even a mortgage-free landlord has costs they need to cover, such as maintenance and insurance, which will have increased.
The question should be whether the rises are in line with costs (which is surely fair) or whether landlords are gouging for the sake of it (which is abhorrent). There’s a big moral difference there.
Landlords are 110% parasites.
​
I won’t hear anything else.
The Guardian finally workout what an investment is. Given the readership I thought they would have worked that out sooner!
It’s not cashing in. It’s free market economics. Should they just be charitable.
Whether a landlord has a mortgage or not is completely irrelevant.
r/georgism
r/JustTaxLand
Consider the discussion on those and similar subreddits – better that that than hoping for hope from an ineffectual Labour party who, at their best might bring in rent controls, raising housing benefit or comparable policies which over the not very long term will become counterproductive.
Food is a greater need than shelter.
When I go to the supermarket at 9 pm in the discount section I can see a ready meal discounted from £4 to £1.60. Right behind me is the supermarket worker with a bin bag, ready to throw it away. They will not reduce it further. They will lock their bins so people can’t even fish it out of the bin. They literally would rather throw away a basic necessity rather than giving it to me for profit.
This is done for literally everything, food, drink, clothes, electronics, books.
Yet somehow all the commies in the comments think it’s the landlords who are the problem here.
No. Just increase the supply of homes to buy and rent. If you keep fucking with landlords the rents will just keep rising….
The higher rents are determined by market forces not whether or not the landlord has an ‘excuse’. Daft article.
The market rate is higher why the hell wouldn’t they?
This is just the headlines for the sake of headlines, landlords obviously are not there to provide affordable social housing, they are businesses through and through. Stop hating the players and hate the game. The government of lack of social housing, no homes being built, high emigration, allowing cheap credit, selling off council properties, crap legislation for renters rights, no strict policies or taxes for multi property owners, no policies for empty houses, no restriction from foreign buyers etc has all led to this
Indeed- sadly, had interest rates not flatlined after 2008, reflecting idiotic Monetary Policy of 1997/98, and the Magic Money Tree of QE not been raided, savers would not have been unlikely to have reallocated cash into property based investments. But, pension fund trustees also followed the herd.
The question is. Can we eat them?
What do the parasitical rich taste like?