HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2018, 7:13 PM
BrownTown BrownTown is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago View Post
That is what a lease is for.
Exactly. It's already been said like 5 times, but just to further beat a dead horse; just because there isnt rent control doesn't mean the owner can just randomly change the rent on a whim. There is almost always a legally binding rental agreement in place and the rent is fixed until that agreement ends (generally after one year).

This all just goes back to my frustration with the fatalistic attitudes so many people have. Like they complain rent is too expensive, job prospects are bad, etc. and they always want the government to fix it, but 80% of the time they could fix their own problems if they were just willing to move instead of acting like some Medieval serf who's bound to a certain city or even neighborhood come hell or high water.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2018, 8:12 PM
Jonesy55 Jonesy55 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtown,man View Post
Now he is stuck with it, he cant sell the home in the small town its in because its too unaffordable and theres too little buyers at that price range.
Well if we are talking about free markets then there is also the option for owners to reduce their asking price if they want to get shot of a property, there should be no such thing as being stuck with it. If something can't find a buyer in a free market then it is probably priced too high.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2018, 8:15 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrownTown View Post
This all just goes back to my frustration with the fatalistic attitudes so many people have. Like they complain rent is too expensive, job prospects are bad, etc. and they always want the government to fix it, but 80% of the time they could fix their own problems if they were just willing to move instead of acting like some Medieval serf who's bound to a certain city or even neighborhood come hell or high water.
Ding ding ding

Truth is, we have created a culture in America where we want and expect elected officials to fix everything, and elected officials go along with this game even though almost everything action they take winds up distorting the market immensely and rarely achieves a satisfactory effect. In fact, usually they just make matters worse in some way.
__________________
Supercar Adventures is my YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4W...lUKB1w8ED5bV2Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2018, 9:21 PM
Sun Belt Sun Belt is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Envy of the World
Posts: 4,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
Ding ding ding

Truth is, we have created a culture in America where we want and expect elected officials to fix everything, and elected officials go along with this game even though almost everything action they take winds up distorting the market immensely and rarely achieves a satisfactory effect. In fact, usually they just make matters worse in some way.
Elected officials don't actually believe any of this non-sense because they're surrounded by smart people that use their brains. It is just that they have figured out a way to get votes from people that won't ever receive anything in return and if you're an elected official you would only shoot yourself in your foot if you ever made it clear to those people to leave the city for greener pastures.

So what do we get? People that resent the system, the wealthy and continue to vote for these people to help them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2018, 1:04 AM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonesy55 View Post
Well if we are talking about free markets then there is also the option for owners to reduce their asking price if they want to get shot of a property, there should be no such thing as being stuck with it. If something can't find a buyer in a free market then it is probably priced too high.
Thank you for your advice...

However, he bought the house in the middle of the country. Not many people in rural Arkansas are looking or able to afford such an expensive house(for Arkansas). It was bought as a place to retire in, not an investment. Life happens though. And sure, he could lower the price and pay like 50k just to sale it...

I wasn't bringing this up for a woe is me(or my dad)...only to illustrate that just because youre a landlord doesn't mean you are Donald Trump. Shit happens in life, to everyone.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2018, 4:37 AM
sopas ej's Avatar
sopas ej sopas ej is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South Pasadena, California
Posts: 6,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10023 View Post
Most renters don’t benefit from it. Most renters are hurt by it. For 8 years in NYC, I paid more rent because rent control exists.
How are most renters hurt by rent control? Please explain that one to me, because it makes it so that EVERYONE'S rent doesn't get jacked up by a high amount. Even though you were paying higher rent, wasn't your rent the same for a while, and only went up by a small percentage when it did go up? Or does rent control not work that way in NYC? Because that's how it works in Los Angeles. Currently, the CPI is 3%, so that's as high a landlord can raise the rent currently in the city of LA, for dwellings that were built before 10/1/1978, and are not single family homes, affordable housing units, or luxury apartments.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 10023 View Post
And no, no one is homeless because the rent is high.
They're not??? Maybe it's the view from the bubble I live in that says otherwise? I guess the view from the bubble you live in is different from mine?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 10023 View Post
If they’re not mentally ill, they’re homeless because they’re a stubborn ass or an idiot. A rational person doesn’t live on the streets in whatever neighborhood because they can’t afford rent, they move to a cheaper neighborhood. So they have a long commute... boohoo. There are high net worth people in NYC or London who commute an hour each way because that’s how they get the living arrangement they want. And if you’re talking about people who sleep on friends’ sofas, stay with family, etc... these people aren’t really “homeless”.
Oh yeah, sure, anyone can just move to a cheaper place. You might as well say "Let them eat cake." You do realize, that it takes money and time and effort, to find another place to live in? It takes a car to probably look for a cheaper place out in the exurbs? What if said car was repossessed? Or the owner can't drive it because they no longer can pay for insurance? Had to sell it because they needed the money? And I don't know about you, but I'm sure most of these people aren't hiring real estate agents and brokers to go find a cheaper place for them? Sure, you can look this stuff up online, but eventually you have to go out and look at the place, right?

And people who sleep on friends' sofas; maybe you should ask their friends if the people they're allowing to sleep on their sofas are homeless?
__________________
"I guess the only time people think about injustice is when it happens to them."

~ Charles Bukowski
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2018, 4:44 AM
sopas ej's Avatar
sopas ej sopas ej is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South Pasadena, California
Posts: 6,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
In a free market economy that is the property buyer’s right.

One of the things you aren’t acknowledging is that “ownership” gives you rights that “lessees” don’t have, but being the owner you also have burdens that lessees don’t.

Owners have to maintain the building at their own costs. Tenants dont.
Owners have to pay the property tax and insurance on the property. Not tenants
Owners have to pay the mortgage, tenants don’t
Owners have to deal with zoning issues, not tenants
Owners have to deal with any medico-legal liabilities related to their property, not tenants

So if the owner is going to be stuck with all this, then they deserve certain rights, such as deciding what to charge to live in their property.

Tenants can’t have their cake and eat it too. You can’t have all the benefits of being a tenant while also have the rights of ownership. If you want to have the rights of ownership, then go buy your own property.
If you own a rental property and you are renting to people, then it is a business. And as a business, it is subject to regulation. All the things you mentioned are business expenses. And as such, they are tax deductible.

And just like there are consumer protections and rights for consumers, there are tenant protections and rights for tenants. If a rental property owner doesn't like these laws, and the expense of being in the business of renting living spaces to people, then maybe they shouldn't be in that business.

You say tenants can't have their cake and eat it too? Well, business people can't have their cake and eat it too, either. Rental property owners are subject to laws and codes that govern rental properties.
__________________
"I guess the only time people think about injustice is when it happens to them."

~ Charles Bukowski
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2018, 4:48 AM
sopas ej's Avatar
sopas ej sopas ej is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South Pasadena, California
Posts: 6,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post


Repeal Of Rent Control Limits To Have Chilling Effect On Housing, Construction

Read more at: https://www.bisnow.com/sacramento/ne...medium=Browser
Says the article from a commercial real estate rag.
__________________
"I guess the only time people think about injustice is when it happens to them."

~ Charles Bukowski
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2018, 8:42 AM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by sopas ej View Post
How are most renters hurt by rent control? Please explain that one to me, because it makes it so that EVERYONE'S rent doesn't get jacked up by a high amount. Even though you were paying higher rent, wasn't your rent the same for a while, and only went up by a small percentage when it did go up? Or does rent control not work that way in NYC? Because that's how it works in Los Angeles. Currently, the CPI is 3%, so that's as high a landlord can raise the rent currently in the city of LA, for dwellings that were built before 10/1/1978, and are not single family homes, affordable housing units, or luxury apartments.
If you are correct about how “it” works in California, then what you are describing is not rent control.

That sounds like a form of rent stabilization, and one that generally applies to all leases, and limits the increase to a certain about per annum. That’s not rent control.

Rent control as most people understand it means that some people are paying $500/mo for an apartment that should be $3,000/mo, and so when there are lots of units subject to rent control, the ones that aren’t have to be more expensive to make the math work for landlords.

It’s unusual in my experience to see rent for a lease renewal go up by much more than CPI anyway. Perhaps a new tenant would pay 5% more, but a change in tenant usually requires a landlord to accept at least one month of vacancy, so they’re not better off.

Anyway, what you’re describing is not “rent control”, and makes very little difference in the market except in rare cases where a certain neighborhood suddenly becomes much more desirable and landlords can ask for big rent increases (which makes moving the even more obvious solution).

Quote:
Originally Posted by sopas ej View Post
They're not??? Maybe it's the view from the bubble I live in that says otherwise? I guess the view from the bubble you live in is different from mine?
If your bubble has homeless people in it, then it’s certainly different from mine. But this isn’t a view based on my own anecdotal experience, it’s based on logic and statistics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sopas ej View Post
Oh yeah, sure, anyone can just move to a cheaper place. You might as well say "Let them eat cake." You do realize, that it takes money and time and effort, to find another place to live in? It takes a car to probably look for a cheaper place out in the exurbs? What if said car was repossessed? Or the owner can't drive it because they no longer can pay for insurance? Had to sell it because they needed the money? And I don't know about you, but I'm sure most of these people aren't hiring real estate agents and brokers to go find a cheaper place for them? Sure, you can look this stuff up online, but eventually you have to go out and look at the place, right?
Yeah. Lots of things in life take money and time. Deal with it.

Wealthy people have to relocate from time to time too. Deal with it.

And you don’t need to move to the exurbs. There are a whole lot of cheap neighborhoods in LA. Someone might just have to move to a worse neighborhood and have a longer commute. That’s life.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sopas ej View Post
And people who sleep on friends' sofas; maybe you should ask their friends if the people they're allowing to sleep on their sofas are homeless?
Why would I do that?

Coach surfing is not homelessness. Someone might say otherwise, but that just means that, like many people on many subjects, their opinion is wrong.
__________________
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2018, 11:23 AM
osmo osmo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,716
Core feature of rent control is it makes mobility much harder as residents are stuck in thier controlled units as they can't afford to leave. In NYC you have renters who stay in apartments for 20+ years to keep the low rents and effectively cast themselves to be rent prisoners who can't afford the gentrified neighborhood around then and can't move.

I see this now in Toronto as rental volume keeps shrinking as there is less moving around as people can't leave they cheap rent.

There has to be an acknowledgement that rent control does not work. All the most expensive North America cities for rent all have some variant of rent control on the books. The silly idea that rents all go up 1000 dollars overnight in a free market system is BS. In free rental markets more supply gets built and on the top end those folks with considerable income and money can continue to bid for the best housing while the rest filters downwards.

Folks need to go look at how Seattle established It's rental market with a tandem of focused supply growth and the removal of rent controls. Seattle is seeing rents on average DECREASE because of these efforts. But let us not get ahead of ourselves as foolish lawmakers want to reverse the ban on rent controls.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2018, 1:15 PM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,144
Quote:
Originally Posted by sopas ej View Post
If you own a rental property and you are renting to people, then it is a business. And as a business, it is subject to regulation. All the things you mentioned are business expenses. And as such, they are tax deductible.

And just like there are consumer protections and rights for consumers, there are tenant protections and rights for tenants. If a rental property owner doesn't like these laws, and the expense of being in the business of renting living spaces to people, then maybe they shouldn't be in that business.

You say tenants can't have their cake and eat it too? Well, business people can't have their cake and eat it too, either. Rental property owners are subject to laws and codes that govern rental properties.
Ah...the classic if you can't afford this tax or this regulation or don't want to put up with this or that you shouldn't be in that business...

Always said by someone with zero connection with anything they are speaking about.

I am not trying to be rude man, really, you seem like a nice dude, but I see this attempt so often its almost seemingly mandatory to come up in a discussion about anything business related.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2018, 2:55 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by sopas ej View Post
If you own a rental property and you are renting to people, then it is a business. And as a business, it is subject to regulation. All the things you mentioned are business expenses. And as such, they are tax deductible.

And just like there are consumer protections and rights for consumers, there are tenant protections and rights for tenants. If a rental property owner doesn't like these laws, and the expense of being in the business of renting living spaces to people, then maybe they shouldn't be in that business.

You say tenants can't have their cake and eat it too? Well, business people can't have their cake and eat it too, either. Rental property owners are subject to laws and codes that govern rental properties.
I’m not following you. You don’t think I understand my own business’s existing rules and regulations?

The landlord/tenant relationship is already regulated with plenty of municipal laws and protections for both.

What I’m talking about is adding a new regulation stating that landlords are now capped with what they can charge, ignoring the fact that the cost of goods and services used to maintain property, property taxes, insurance, etc are continuing to go up without any cap whatsoever.

It almost seems lazy and, frankly, mean-spirited for society to say to someone, “we are going to cap how much you may raise your prices, ignoring the obvious fact that all of your upstream costs keep going up and up, but haha it’s your problem, fuck off, learn to understand your business better, and I’m just trying to get votes”
__________________
Supercar Adventures is my YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4W...lUKB1w8ED5bV2Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2018, 3:24 PM
Northern Light Northern Light is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
I see no reason to believe that raising rents is suddenly going to make thousands of people homeless. There are always other apartments, homes, etc that are cheaper and ready to rent.

People move around in their lives all the time due to things that aren’t always in their control, and this is no different.
Let me suggest to you your interpretation doesn't work in some cities.

Let's take Toronto.

If you were earning minimum wage, full-time, as a single person, you would be earning $14 per hour.

This works out to about $28,000 CAD gross per year.

If we assume someone can afford up to 40% of their income on housing, that would mean such an earner should be able to find a place in Toronto for $933 per month.

Good luck w/that.

No matter how far your willing to move out, or how modest your standards are, there are virtually no apartments that price point.

Let's add here, that most guidelines on affordability would use a number below 40%, and if we used 30%, you would need to find an apartment at $700 per month.

There is no such apartment in Toronto or its suburbs.

I personally know someone who was renting a basement suite in a nice area of Toronto, and he got booted so the landlord could do a gut job and get more $$.

He is/was making decently above the minimum and paying more in rent than I noted above, yet he found it an incredible struggle to find anything in his budget.

A professional TV reporter in Toronto, making a good living ended up couch surfing and doing a story on it, because the landlord of the condo she rented jacked the rent by almost 1k on renewal.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...rfer-1.3985771

There are markets where supply and demand are so out of whack that losing an apartment is dangerous.

(vacancy in Toronto is under 1%)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2018, 3:34 PM
Northern Light Northern Light is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post

It almost seems lazy and, frankly, mean-spirited for society to say to someone, “we are going to cap how much you may raise your prices, ignoring the obvious fact that all of your upstream costs keep going up and up, but haha it’s your problem, fuck off, learn to understand your business better, and I’m just trying to get votes”
There are many variations of rent control.

In Ontario, the government determines the rate of increase for the coming year based on an inflation index tied to costs the typical landlord experiences, property tax, utilities etc.

If you, as a landlord, face extraordinary increases in utilities, you can apply to a tribunal to pass those on to your tenants.

If you have to carry out a major capital project that is not purely cosmetic, or routine such as roof replacement, or boiler replacement, that too is eligible for a special above-guideline increase.

Alternatively, their are models that require that when you set the initial rent you set it at a number that allows you to put away 10% for future major maintenance costs such as the above.

Rent control, at its best, ensures that tenants don't receive shocking increases that compel moves; but does not pose an undue burden on landlords.

I would agree that in an ideal market place, supply and demand would mostly arrest the need for such regulations.

But clearly in Toronto, and I imagine in SF and NYC and Vancouver the market has failed to address the shortage of rental housing.

That requires some sort of intervention for existing tenants pending an intervention to resolve the supply question.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2018, 4:08 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
^ If we were forced to take on rent control, a model such as yours would probably be the best way to go about it.

However, the devil is in the details, and my impression from my 42 years on this earth is that Governments do an incredibly lousy job of addressing issues in a timely and fair fashion, and often at a whim can penalize or scapegoat certain classes of people just to get votes. So I'm quite skeptical.

For example: does this "application process" take forever? How bad is the bureaucratic red tape? Is it corrupt? (Remember, I'm in Chicago...). Can you even get somebody on the phone if there is a problem? Do lawyers need to be involved (increasing your costs more and more, hence what's the point?). What happens if there is a wave of populism and some racially-motivated Aldermen decide that they want to alter the regulation so that it pinches landlords even further?

You see, once you open Pandora's box--a new regulation--it rarely stays the same. It snowballs and can become more and more burdensome, more politically charged, and more of a tool with which to elicit quid pro quo.

Hence it sounds nice in theory, but in Chicago it absolutely could become a nightmare.
__________________
Supercar Adventures is my YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4W...lUKB1w8ED5bV2Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2018, 5:03 PM
osmo osmo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Light View Post
Let me suggest to you your interpretation doesn't work in some cities.

Let's take Toronto.

If you were earning minimum wage, full-time, as a single person, you would be earning $14 per hour.

This works out to about $28,000 CAD gross per year.

If we assume someone can afford up to 40% of their income on housing, that would mean such an earner should be able to find a place in Toronto for $933 per month.

Good luck w/that.

No matter how far your willing to move out, or how modest your standards are, there are virtually no apartments that price point.

Let's add here, that most guidelines on affordability would use a number below 40%, and if we used 30%, you would need to find an apartment at $700 per month.

There is no such apartment in Toronto or its suburbs.

I personally know someone who was renting a basement suite in a nice area of Toronto, and he got booted so the landlord could do a gut job and get more $$.

He is/was making decently above the minimum and paying more in rent than I noted above, yet he found it an incredible struggle to find anything in his budget.

A professional TV reporter in Toronto, making a good living ended up couch surfing and doing a story on it, because the landlord of the condo she rented jacked the rent by almost 1k on renewal.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...rfer-1.3985771

There are markets where supply and demand are so out of whack that losing an apartment is dangerous.

(vacancy in Toronto is under 1%)
You're out too lunch. I've been part of this demographic and have lived in basement apartments to a high of $900 in the desirable downtown west area of Toronto. Did far too much of my money go to rent ? Yes, but living central let me work two jobs which made things fine. If you're low income you just have to give more hours to getting income versus others. You can't expect to work part time and live in Toronto. Everyone is working. Unless you have a disability you have no excuses. Either work harder or smarter or go move to Guelph where you can find an apartment for $500 and work part time.

You can find apartments all over that are affordable, younger can't expect anything perfect as it will either be ramshackle and in a great location or decent and far away in Scarborough.

Also, tenancy protections are rock solid in Ontario. Your friend does not know the rules because it is very difficult to boot out a Tennant in Ontario. A Tennant can refuse to leave and can be put in a position to negotiate a break in the lease. If you truly like a place them there has to be proactive action to put forward a renew of lease.

The stories of people getting rent jacked up were due to living in condos where your landlord is not experienced and is beholden to thier own tight carrying costs. No experienced landlord operates in such a way to drastically raise rents which is solely just a tactic to get the unit free.

The new rent controls in Ontario have made it less affordable for me. I have no issue with rich people over paying to rent condos (some people pay $1500 to rent a room which is thier own stupidity, Toronto isn't NYC or DC). It was good to see them over pay while the rest of the housing stock remains modest in rent. Now that is gone each landlord is jacking it up beyond what is reasonable when they get a vacancy. Nobody wants to point out that media rents have gone UP since rent controls were implemented on all units. So that is what people get for being ignorant to the market and how it operates. Everyone is paying more now due to bonehead policies.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2018, 5:39 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by sopas ej View Post
Says the article from a commercial real estate rag.
It's a business oriented weekly newspaper with a substantial subscription cost, not a free "rag". It covers real estate like other business. And in this case it's right. Or would you have us take your uncredentialed opinions over any other?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2018, 8:33 PM
cannedairspray cannedairspray is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 2,210
I'm as much for saying fuck the poor as the next guy, but OP are you just looking for a leg to stand on, morally, because you're a landlord?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2018, 8:52 PM
Northern Light Northern Light is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by osmo View Post
You're out too lunch.
Am not. AND I would greatly appreciate if you would not make an effort to seem like a complete jackass by starting your reply w/childish insults.

It doesn't take any longer to be respectful and explain your experience or point of view and provide citations to support it, if possible.

Quote:
I've been part of this demographic and have lived in basement apartments to a high of $900 in the desirable downtown west area of Toronto.
That anecodote is great. When?

I went to University for less than $3,000 in first year tuition, doesn't mean anyone else gets to today.

I just did a search of www.viewit.ca of available 1-bedroom apartments (including basements) and looked from the Humber River to south Scarborough up to Don Mills and Central Scarborough (south of 401, as far east as McCowan.)

Of units that actually listed the rent, I found a whopping 4 unit under 1k.

Of these, three were 'plus utilities' (which can vary widely but are typically around $125 per month, in my experience.)

There were others listed as 'call for $$' but I know from talking to those who have searched that these are often generic listings w/o any units on offer (big buildings) or lures to get you to look and like before stating a much higher rent.

The vacancy rate is under 1% that is not a balanced market, period, full-stop.

No Expert in economics or real estate will suggest different.

Remember, that's also for a one-bedroom, some people actually have children and require more space.

In Canada, the child benefit may assist w/this, but I'll tell you right now make that if you do that same search a two-bedroom, you won't find much under $1,500. The Child benefit isn't that rich for someone whose dirt poor, let alone someone who works 40 hours and makes over minimum.


Quote:
Did far too much of my money go to rent ? Yes, but living central let me work two jobs which made things fine. If you're low income you just have to give more hours to getting income versus others. You can't expect to work part time and live in Toronto.
My friend works an average of 44 hours per week, on swing shift. He doesn't work part-time and doesn't need more hours.

He also earns a good deal more than the minimum, but he has a child to support.

Your attitude is really cavalier and assumes anyone who needs a place under $1,500 is somehow single, no kids, young, and apparently spending their time goofing off working part-time.

That describes a very tiny portion of those who would like or need more affordable housing.


Quote:
Also, tenancy protections are rock solid in Ontario. Your friend does not know the rules because it is very difficult to boot out a Tennant in Ontario. A Tennant can refuse to leave and can be put in a position to negotiate a break in the lease. If you truly like a place them there has to be proactive action to put forward a renew of lease.
He knows the rules well, because I taught him and I've been to the tribunal before (and won)

The reality is that a landlord who says they require the unit to do major renovations can evict on those grounds. The landlord gave 90 days notice which is more than the law requires.

The rear of the home, an old enclosed porch, was being demolished and replaced with a permanent addition including adding to the basement unit.

The purpose was to bring the home up to area expectations.

That work has now been completed and his old unit (still basement) rented for $1,550 a month, notably higher than his old payments.

Quote:
The stories of people getting rent jacked up were due to living in condos where your landlord is not experienced and is beholden to thier own tight carrying costs. No experienced landlord operates in such a way to drastically raise rents which is solely just a tactic to get the unit free.
There are literally 10's of thousands of renters in the condo market, because of the tight rental supply. Most of those landlords are inexperienced, often speculators parking their money. Lots are moving units into Air BnB market these days too.

Quote:
The new rent controls in Ontario have made it less affordable for me. I have no issue with rich people over paying to rent condos (some people pay $1500 to rent a room which is thier own stupidity, Toronto isn't NYC or DC). It was good to see them over pay while the rest of the housing stock remains modest in rent. Now that is gone each landlord is jacking it up beyond what is reasonable when they get a vacancy. Nobody wants to point out that media rents have gone UP since rent controls were implemented on all units. So that is what people get for being ignorant to the market and how it operates. Everyone is paying more now due to bonehead policies.
Would you kindly look at the graph in the link below....and note the rate of rent increases for the last decade or so.........rent was not flat-lining before the new rent control measures

https://www.torontorentals.com/blog/...nto-since-2000

Note that these are 'average rents' paid and not vacancies on the market.

Rents are not increasing faster than they were in 2018 according to anything I can see, but I'll gladly accept any facts you have that are contrary.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2018, 9:17 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by cannedairspray View Post
I'm as much for saying fuck the poor as the next guy, but OP are you just looking for a leg to stand on, morally, because you're a landlord?
I wasn’t aware that owning a building and deciding what a complete stranger who could possibly even be wealthier than you should pay to live in your building was immoral.

Seems like it is the rent control advocates who are the ones labeling property owners as immoral, without ever really having made a sound case why that is so.
__________________
Supercar Adventures is my YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4W...lUKB1w8ED5bV2Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:59 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.