Debt and Pay - There Has to be a Balance.

[morganist]

Quote from Free Thinker:

still, the tenents are willing to pay what the landlord is asking(demand) for whatever reason. if the tenents all decided the price was too high and moved out the landlord would soon lower his rent. supply and demand at work.

Where else are they going to live?

It is a necessity remember.

There is a housing shortage in the UK.

Anyway the point was not to discuss free market economics it was to see if there was another way to pay off the debt they owe without cutting interest rates further (this just kicks the can down the road) or printing money (this will just create inflation).

As landlords receive that income if the amount they receive is cut it frees money up to be spent on repaying debt (this just redistributes the money in a way that enables repayment, with no consequences other than reduced income for landlords).

Do you have any other suggestions on how to pay off the private debt?

 

[morganist]

Quote from morganist:

Where else are they going to live?

It is a necessity remember.

There is a housing shortage in the UK.

Anyway the point was not to discuss free market economics it was to see if there was another way to pay off the debt they owe without cutting interest rates further (this just kicks the can down the road) or printing money (this will just create inflation).

As landlords receive that income if the amount they receive is cut it frees money up to be spent on repaying debt (this just redistributes the money in a way that enables repayment, with no consequences other than reduced income for landlords).

Do you have any other suggestions on how to pay off the private debt?

Try and see it another way. Say you have an individual who earns $2,000 per months. They owe $1,000 and their rent is $1,000. If the individual loses $200 a month in income they only have $1,800. The debt is inflexible without losing someone their pension or savings (default). The rent can move in most cases. So do you A.) Let the debt default or B.) Reduce the rent?

Which do you think is better?

The only two macroeconomic mechanism available are cutting the interest rate which will just make people more in debt or QE which which will create inflation. Cutting the rent will do neither of these things. It will just reduce the income of the landlord who has been overcharging anyway.

 

[peilthetraveler]

Quote from morganist:

Many of the rented properties in the UK have existing mortgages on them from the landlord. The tenant pays the mortgage for them with the rent. If the rent cannot be made it may impair mortgage repayment. Is it morally right to allow one person to rent out a property when they do not own it. They are basically getting a house bought for them by someone else just because the bank allowed them to borrow the money to buy the house.

Most people cant afford to buy a house outright. The people that can would obviously be living in those homes. Then if someone could own a 2nd home to rent out how much do you think they would charge? Probably alot more than current rents because competition has been reduced as other people are locked out of the landlord game.

I believe if you stop letting people get mortgages you will get people trying to make due with what they can afford and since 64% of americans have less than $1,000 in the bank, you would quickly see homes starting to look like this as that is all they can afford.

 

[sellindexvol66]

Quote from morganist:

The decision by the bank on who is lent the money determines who can buy the property. As I said the only difference between the landlord and the tenant on a mortgaged property is who the bank decided to lend the money to.

In any event there is definitely no justification for the rents being as high as they have been. I think this will come back to bite the landlords on the butt. When the recession really hits and people can't pay rent the mortgaged landlords could lose the property. This happened a lot in the UK in 2008. I suspect it will happen again.

Are you smoking some serious shit? Renters by definition do not have the money or wherewithall to buy a property to live in. The landlord is essentially a savior to them..for that the landlord gets a slight premium if things are working properly.

Please note communism failed and now socialism is failing miserably...i am interested in what your solution would be to landlord/renter reality? to simply complain yet offer not even a hint of a solution is ridiculous. You must be joking to get traffic.

 

[oldtime]

I think what you might be missing is, when I bought my house, I put 20% down

 

[Random.Capital]

Quote from morganist:

Is it morally right to allow one person to rent out a property when they do not own it.

The very concept of a mortgage runs contrary to fundamental principles of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, so from a non-secular perspective, the scenario is inherently immoral regardless of who is paying the mortgage.

 

[Random.Capital]

Quote from sellindexvol66:


Please note communism failed and now socialism is failing miserably...

Ironically, they both outlasted capitalism.

 

[oldtime]

Quote from Random.Capital:

Ironically, they both outlasted capitalism.

Milton Bradley had it figured out. Once somebody owns Park Place and Boardwalk, and all you are stuck with is Baltic Avenue, it's time to admit defeat and start the game back up over again.

The fun is in the getting it, not the having it.

 

[morganist]

Quote from sellindexvol66:

Are you smoking some serious shit? Renters by definition do not have the money or wherewithall to buy a property to live in. The landlord is essentially a savior to them..for that the landlord gets a slight premium if things are working properly.

Please note communism failed and now socialism is failing miserably...i am interested in what your solution would be to landlord/renter reality? to simply complain yet offer not even a hint of a solution is ridiculous. You must be joking to get traffic.

There is a detailed solution to the issue if you read the original article.

 

[morganist]

Quote from peilthetraveler:

Most people cant afford to buy a house outright. The people that can would obviously be living in those homes. Then if someone could own a 2nd home to rent out how much do you think they would charge? Probably alot more than current rents because competition has been reduced as other people are locked out of the landlord game.

I believe if you stop letting people get mortgages you will get people trying to make due with what they can afford and since 64% of americans have less than $1,000 in the bank, you would quickly see homes starting to look like this as that is all they can afford.

If what you are saying is true it means either a small percentage of people are taking advantage of the property market and exploiting people, which a rent control would stop. Or that if the stimulus stopped the property marekt would fall because according to you Americans are so poor.