Landlords Sue to Stop Eviction Ban

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: andy06shake

Its to help pay your rent if you're unemployed or on a low income.

I would not have imagine many Americans would have been up for such a safety net all the same.

Damned commies....they get everywhere.
Imagine, government trying to make sure that landlords don't exploit the poor and vulnerable.

I think you may be missing a part of this. If the land lords can't evict folks for not paying rent, do the loan holders of the properties the landlords own not need payment either? I can understand the need to not throw families out in the street during all this, but there are more parts to the puzzle than the first part. If I owned property and was told I had to keep it up and pay for it, but wasn't allowed to do anything if my renters stopped paying, I'd be looking to sue the government for forcing me into bankruptcy.

a reply to: zosimov

What? "The evil property owners?" "They're all rich! They got that way by exploiting the people". "Let the people take what should be theirs!"

Sarcasm off. That's the attitude of the "People's Republic of Portland" and other like minded areas of Oregon. There are no property rights according to them.

originally posted by: network dude
If I owned property and was told I had to keep it up and pay for it, but wasn't allowed to do anything if my renters stopped paying, I'd be looking to sue the government for forcing me into bankruptcy.

You don't need that other property, it's excessive, you should share your stuff.

I'll be over shortly to go through some of your other things for equalitative purposes. I will level set you.

The state needs to do this with cars, and with food, groceries.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: andy06shake

Its to help pay your rent if you're unemployed or on a low income.

I would not have imagine many Americans would have been up for such a safety net all the same.

Damned commies....they get everywhere.
Imagine, government trying to make sure that landlords don't exploit the poor and vulnerable.

I think you may be missing a part of this. If the land lords can't evict folks for not paying rent, do the loan holders of the properties the landlords own not need payment either? I can understand the need to not throw families out in the street during all this, but there are more parts to the puzzle than the first part. If I owned property and was told I had to keep it up and pay for it, but wasn't allowed to do anything if my renters stopped paying, I'd be looking to sue the government for forcing me into bankruptcy.

That is the big issue. Most landlords are just individual owners with one or two properties mortgaged to the hilt. If they don't get a tenant's rent payment, they are digging into their own savings (assuming they even have any) to cover the mortgage on the property.

As someone else mentioned, if government starts allowing this then landlords will need to be more picky in terms of choosing future tenants. No one would want to rent to a tenant that can't show substantial savings or a stable job/career not susceptible to frequent shutdowns.

Rent would go up as landlords would need to start putting money away for rainy days.

The net result is housing continues to become more unaffordable for those that need cheaper housing the most.

But of course, we see how much money government pissed away with that stimulus package. Just think if they focused the money on providing it to those who really need it instead of giving tens of millions to study LBGTQ issues in Pakistan among other things.

a reply to: network dude

April should be interesting. Pretty sure that's when everything's gonna really go tits up.

How about just end the dumbass lock downs?

Let people work so they can pay their f-ing bills.

No need for gubment.

a reply to: Freeborn
Imagine that some people think that expecting to be paid for use of their property as per agreement is exploitation.

originally posted by: FauxMulder
How about just end the dumbass lock downs?

Let people work so they can pay their f-ing bills.

No need for gubment.

Work where?

Businesses have gone out of business.

a reply to: JIMC5499

And, as a matter of fact, the alternative (relying on the government to provide adequate public housing) is bad. We are definitely better off counting on the good will of landlords than the goodwill of our overlords.

A Google image search of "public housing' says it all.
www.google.com... WcQAzICCAA6BAgAEEM6BAgAEBhQiasMWJmzDGD3tAxoAHAAeACAAWaIAekEkgEDNi4xmAEAoAEBqgELZ3dzLXdpei1pbWfAAQE&sclient=img&ei=Xl_iX-rdOMGE9PwP6qK6uA8&bih=657&biw= 1366

a reply to: DBCowboy

There will be work. As soon as this covid fear is ended. I'm sure they're just waiting on Chairman Jao to be sworn in. Then the media, dem governors, etc will forget all about covid.

Weird thing is, construction industry around here where we didn't close down has been booming this year. I guess everyone want to die of the plague in nicely renovated houses or something.

Eminent domain is the power of a state, provincial, or national government to take private property for public use. It does not include the power to take and transfer ownership of private property from one property owner to another private property owner without a valid public purpose.[3] However, this power can be legislatively delegated by the state to municipalities, government subdivisions, or even to private persons or corporations, when they are authorized by the legislature to exercise the functions of public character.[4]

en.wikipedia.org...

Bold is mine.

States or the federal government will just take over all rental properties.

The government is now the property owner. This always ends well.

a reply to: JAGStorm
I have no answers for this problem Jag but do have a quick observation

[have the government pay the landlords directly.

Ohhhhh, careful there. One more profit driven class being allowed to suck even harder on the government teat.
Wouldn't government paying a difference between what a renter could pay and what the landlord needs to charge to pay the banks for the loans they took out to buy the property in the first place lead to some kind of ''co-ownership'' between the landlord and the government?

🚨 They're trying to trigger an onslaught of property bankruptcies 🚨

a reply to: FauxMulder

That would help, but it won't help in situations where tenants are months behind.

People want to see the landlords as horrible people, but they rely on the money in some cases like the worker relies on his paycheck and this months and months of shutting everything down without allowing the real scope and scale of the issue to be seen isn't helping anyone, and it's all government that's creating this.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

And when the renter is a small business owner? Those are two evil, dirty classes right there -- the filthy capitalist and the filthy property owner. Who should be the victim in all of it?

How dare those evil capitalist landowners not let me live in their house for free while they steal the value of my surplus labor.

a reply to: ketsuko

I know. A big part of me believes the economic pain they've caused people was all political. I guess we'll find out after January 20th. That is, unless they desire to further use this "crisis" to enact their agenda. Never let one go to waste and all that.

a reply to: FauxMulder

The worst are the places that enacted rant moratoriums.

You know there were some people who could have paid their rent and chose not to completely ignoring the idea that the bill was going to come due, and now they're lumped in with the ones who couldn't pay even if they wanted to and crying as if they're victims too.