51–60 of 73 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Deferring payment without interest is punishment. Goods in the future are worth less than the same goods in the present.
And where's someone unemployed going to get 3 month's of rent if they only work in 0 or 1 of the next 3 months?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But who should the government punish? Everyone equally? The richest X%? The poorest X%? Particular industr[y,ies]? If everyone says “not us, somebody else!” there will be no redistribution.
The parent comment is proposing a system where nobody is punished, everything is deferred. Not all landlords are fat cats in a mansion, if you remove the flow of cash to only some people, those people will be crushed if they depend on that flow to send it further upstream.
Possibly the government could restrict that auction to non-property owners to help sort out the first-sentence problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And where's someone unemployed going to get 3 month's of rent if they only work in 0 or 1 of the next 3 months?
That's why you're supposed to have savings, but it seems these days people prefer to spend frivolously
So stop all payments. Nobody pays rent, landowners don’t pay their mortgages, banks don’t pay interest. Companies don’t pay dividends, bonds don’t pay interest. Just stop using money to organize productive activity for a few months until the coronavirus curve flattens. If all payments are stopped for three months, then it’s simply hitting the “Pause” button on the whole money system. There are no economic data for th…
At a high level, credit and money are simply means to align incentives across a wide variety of actors and ensure cooperation. While theoretically it's not impossible to reorganize the economy as not to need it, it would effectively require a complete command economy and I don't think anyone would be able to do this effectively in the short term without completely destroying any semblance of the market economy in the long run.
The obvious play here is just to pay individuals (not businesses) enough money and access to healthcare in the medium term and to let businesses (that aren't obviously strategic to national interests, those can be considered separately) do what they need to do. There are already legal mechanisms in place for businesses to avoid paying creditors and landlords. This is a strange plea for a handout. If the market changed as to make their rent abnormally low relative to their profits, they wouldn't be paying extra rent.
For residential tenants, rent forgiveness at least makes some sense, though I think direct payments to individuals are fairer and avoid cascading effects. For businesses that during the good times keep all surpluses for themselves as profits, to argue for rent forgiveness during the hard times is comical.
> We need legislation to ban rents for COVID-19-affected businesses. This only works if the government mandates full moratorium on both rents and mortgages. That also means that no interest on mortgage is accrued during this time. Otherwise, landlords are screwed in the same way as tenants - they can't pay mortgage and the property may turn into foreclosure. More so, frequently landlords are screwed even more - becau…
Quite a lot of commercial real-estate is owned by financial institutions and when it isn't the trust fund shareholder is also on the board of directors of the bank.
The article is dumb. If the statement "Landlords don’t employ anyone; their benefit to society is frankly pretty marginal" was true, why did the author willingly sign his rent or lease contract (which binds him to pay a large regular payments for a long period)... Why would he do it if there is no benefit!?
The "benefit" obtained by rent is, mainly, permission. When the authoer says landlords don't provide much benefit to society, I think they are comparing against a society in which landlords don't exist. The author pays rent because they have no choice if they want permission to use a property; all available properties are owned by landlords. (You can tell it's more about permission than service provided, because ther…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "benefit" obtained by rent is, mainly, permission. When the authoer says landlords don't provide much benefit to society, I think they are comparing against a society in which landlords don't exist. The author pays rent because they have no choice if they want permission to use a property; all available properties are owned by landlords. (You can tell it's more about permission than service provided, because ther…
I think you would see the benefit if you got rid of landlords and let anarchy rule real estate.
You don't need to only imagine either this current system existing or anarchy.
The article is dumb. If the statement "Landlords don’t employ anyone; their benefit to society is frankly pretty marginal" was true, why did the author willingly sign his rent or lease contract (which binds him to pay a large regular payments for a long period)... Why would he do it if there is no benefit!?
The "benefit" obtained by rent is, mainly, permission. When the authoer says landlords don't provide much benefit to society, I think they are comparing against a society in which landlords don't exist. The author pays rent because they have no choice if they want permission to use a property; all available properties are owned by landlords. (You can tell it's more about permission than service provided, because ther…
The article is dumb. If the statement "Landlords don’t employ anyone; their benefit to society is frankly pretty marginal" was true, why did the author willingly sign his rent or lease contract (which binds him to pay a large regular payments for a long period)... Why would he do it if there is no benefit!?
Because the landlord got there first and staked a claim to the parcel of land, that they then don't use themselves for anything except charging others for the privilege of using it. I mean you can see how it's not a super compelling arrangement even though landlords have made it impossible to avoid in desirable areas.
> We need legislation to ban rents for COVID-19-affected businesses. This only works if the government mandates full moratorium on both rents and mortgages. That also means that no interest on mortgage is accrued during this time. Otherwise, landlords are screwed in the same way as tenants - they can't pay mortgage and the property may turn into foreclosure. More so, frequently landlords are screwed even more - becau…
You fail to realise that in a lot of cases the landlord is also the one who gave himself the mortgage. Quite a lot of commercial real-estate is owned by financial institutions and when it isn't the trust fund shareholder is also on the board of directors of the bank.