this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
578 points (94.5% liked)
Asklemmy
43939 readers
516 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Owning a second home should be illegal.
I think two can be fine, if just to cover weird situations you might find yourself in (cosigning with somebody, somebody dies and leaves it you, or I guess I don't really mind a "summer home"). I think beyond that though I agree.
I think it should be third home illegal
Private landlords are not as bad. If everyone had only one house there'd be nowhere to rent unless you only want to rent the room.
Now corporate landlords. They own so much real estate it's practically a monopoly. And as a business they're profit driven and exploit their tenants. I think renting wasn't so bad before companies started investing in real estate.
This is the real problem! Companies that own many many homes/ apartments are disgusting to deal with - everything is profit driven. Lost my mom recently and her house is transferring to me through the court so every day i get a dozen calls from investors, -" I'm sorry for your loss; can i buy your house? AAA Property Mgmt."
I would rather go with it is illegal to leave a home unoccupied unless you stay there for more than X days an year, say 100.
Progressive property tax. The more properties you own the higher tax you pay on each one.
Having the surplus wealth to justify a second home while there are so many people without homes or living in poverty is the real issue here.
My two cheap houses can cost less then your mansion.
Yep, nobody gets seconds until everyone has eaten but for housing please
I think having multiple houses(for different seasons or whatever) is fine. It is the financial exploitation of housing that is wrong. You shouldnt be able to rent houses.
I would say have as many houses as you like and rent them but there should be universal rent control and progressive property tax (the more properties you own the higher your tax).
Oh, I like this one.
Sometimes you don't get them on purpose.
That's simple though: you sell one of them.
Disagree, so you're correct in that it's an unpopular opinion.
Why?
Because simply building a house costs hundreds of thousands, people starting out in life can't go straight to home ownership.
So does the government provide all rental property? If yes, all good, just wondering what your thinking is.
Unpopular AND ridiculous. Well done!