Earlier quoted context omitted.
So what? Why do you think you should get to live somewhere highly desireable at a below market rate?
[deleted]
You are conflating two very, very different issues.
“Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
231–240 of 628 posts
Re: “Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The landlord was likely losing money keeping it rented at $2145 even if he owned it free and clear. This conveniently omits the fact that there used to be two units in that house, so the actual rent would certainly have been closer to double that amount.
It also conveniently omitted any calculation about how the owner is 'losing money', despite there being a ~$14,000 positive difference between what the tenant is paying per year and the taxes due.
Nelson: Hey, look how much Skinner makes. 25,000 dollars a year!
Bart: Lets see, he's 40 years old, times 25 grand.. woah! He's a millionaire!Re: “Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
#233Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not just because, it's a social priority. How does this legitimize it? A group that votes to dictate what I can do with my property might be doing it by the letter of the law, but that doesn't make it morally right. If I've earned something (e.g., I've gotten it legitimately through trade, as opposed to theft or fraud), that means I've poured some part of my life into earning that thing. Apart from issues where…
Most property, if you trace out the actual chain of transactions, originates in theft or fraud. Either a monarch or other military force took it from another group by force and parceled out pieces of it (theft) or literally just claimed it from afar (without occupation) and decided who to grant it to (fraud). Just because you are some steps removed from the beginning of the transaction chain, does not mean that you h…
- What about the software I wrote in the past year and a half for the schools I work for?
- What about the designs my co-worker painstakingly worked on over the same period?
- What about the reams of reports my wife wrote at her company, which makes heart valves? She gets up at 4:30 in the morning, comes home at around 5 at night, works after dinner. When there's an important deadline coming up (which is almost all the time), she works weekends.
All of these things are property. Each of us poured ourselves into these things. We could have done other things, but we chose to do these things. In a way, we're not special - we're just three people, out of billions.
None of us are thieves. You can casually toss around your equivocations and guilt-tripping for being born, but that doesn't change the fact that many people are honest and have earned what they have.
Re: “Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the records on Zillow, assuming they owned the unit free and clear, the landlord was likely losing money at the current rent: it's less than the current taxes on the unit. Should they have been forced to continue to rent the unit out at a loss?
Zillow has property taxes at $11,043/year The tenant was paying $2,145/month = $25,470/year. According to the letter, they forced out another tenant. IF that tenant was paying a similar amount, the landlord was making >4x taxes in rent, not less than the current taxes. Also, the current owners bought the property on 12/30/2014. Why should anyone have sympathy for them having tenants? They knew they were buying a rent…
correction to myself on "buying", it appears the previous owner was "SHUKRY & VERA LAMA RVC LVG TR" and the new owner is "LAMA NADIA V", so it probably was an inheritance, not a purchase.
Re: “Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
I lived in Chicago before moving to SF a few years ago, and I can't imagine ever going back. There is an argument about jobs, people, and companies that's complex, but people pay so much for so little space because it really is that valuable. The weather is near perfect year round, the food/beer/wine is astounding, the landscape is glorious, and so on. Midwest winters, particularly as climate change is making them wo…
Is the weather, food/beer/wine, and landscape really that much better than Santa Cruz? Is it that much better than Raleigh? Or Austin? Or any other city that isn't San Francisco? Besides the benefits you might get from SF, let's be realistic: the city doesn't want you. It doesn't want any of you. The only benefit you're getting is the people who moved there just like you, and the city doesn't want them, either. If th…
I think the people "that don't want you" are a small, although vocal, minority of San Francisco. Most San Franciscans prefer gentrification and tech workers to slums and everything that entails. The silent majority, is just that- silent. There is construction happening all over the city now, I think people are starting to "get it"- if you want lower rents, you have to build more hosing.
I've been in SF since I was 9 years old, so feel that I can comment as a near native.
Re: “Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
#236Here is the home: http://www.trulia.com/homes/California/San_Francisco/sold/71... Taxes are 11,043 with a value of 904,085. $2145 looks like an EXTREMELY low rent for a house of this size in San Francisco. (half of the rent is just property taxes.) The landlord was likely losing money keeping it rented at $2145 even if he owned it free and clear.
Zillow has it going up in tax last year from $1,500 a year but it hasn't been sold since 1976. Either the sale is slow to show up or someone just inherited the house without a trust. In which case getting the renters out and selling is not surprising.
I'm not an expert on California law, but the property changed hands on 12/30/2014
Grantor: SHUKRY & VERA LAMA RVC LVG TR Grantee: LAMA NADIA V
Re: “Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
#237Re: “Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand this argument. _Quality_ housing seems to me, to be a normal good, because when income increases the demand for such housing increases. Even crappy places in SF seem to be quality housing. Whether or not there are class issues, or your house is sentimental is irrelevant. Edit: typo
Apparently "normal good" is an economic technical term, and apparently you are using that technical definition here and not the normal use of "normal". I have no idea why you'd do that; as you point out, that technical term bears no relation to what I'm talking about.
Words have meanings. In the context of a discussion of economic activity, you really have "no idea" why someone would assume you were using the economic meaning of "normal good?
Re: “Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
OTOH, how much can you restrict the property owner? What if the other unit needed to be knocked down for a reason other than to get rid of rent control? Would it be OK for the law to tell the owner to fix it some other way? What if both units were destroyed in a natural disaster and a new structure had to be built from nothing? Is that still rent-controlled? Also, is rent control even a good idea? In the short term,…
What you're missing is that housing is not a normal good. Sure, there is a housing marketplace, which can provide some correction. But houses are also homes. People are born in them. People die in them. They love them, they cherish them, they fight for them. There's a lot of truth in the saying, "Home is where the heart is." What you're missing in that scenario is the large number of people who are displaced not just…
So why not create a lifetime rent control that is tied to the occupancy of the current tenant? One they're gone, it's fair game for anyone at any price and you protect the "right to a home" for the existing resident.
That said, I don't think a rental can ever be a home in the way you describe it. The fact that the property is owned by another party means the resident will always be limited in their sense of place during their tenancy. This example is egregious but as an example, there's nothing to force a landlord to rebuild a property with after a disaster for the tenant with the insurance money.
Re: “Your monthly rent .. shall increase from $2145 to $8900”
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
I lived in Chicago before moving to SF a few years ago, and I can't imagine ever going back. There is an argument about jobs, people, and companies that's complex, but people pay so much for so little space because it really is that valuable. The weather is near perfect year round, the food/beer/wine is astounding, the landscape is glorious, and so on. Midwest winters, particularly as climate change is making them wo…
Is the weather, food/beer/wine, and landscape really that much better than Santa Cruz? Is it that much better than Raleigh? Or Austin? Or any other city that isn't San Francisco? Besides the benefits you might get from SF, let's be realistic: the city doesn't want you. It doesn't want any of you. The only benefit you're getting is the people who moved there just like you, and the city doesn't want them, either. If th…
Santa Cruz? Have you been there? It's definitely a love it or hate it kind of place. The food is better in SF. It's something like 78 miles down the coast, so the beer and wine are the same. The landscape is about the same. The big problem is going to be your commute over hwy 17. I did it for years and liked it, but it's not for the faint of heart or the skittish in car. Never been to Raleigh or Austin, but today was high 60's low 70's, and went for a walk on the beach. The weather will likely be the same in the dog days of summer. Can you say the same of the south/texas?
As for San Francisco not wanting people. It is over blown in my opinion. San Francisco did not want the gays, hippies, beats, Hispanics (even the one's who were originally living here), Chinese, Japanese or any other group who moved in to the city. Never stopped anyone and everyone gets over it eventually...