this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2025
980 points (98.8% liked)

People Twitter

8190 readers
1830 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Because costs only go up, that's why. It may not be profitable tomorrow at all.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 18 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

to whom? unless the rent can change (which it realistically shouldn't if the law is written well) it still won't be profitable

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

People make bad investments all the time.

[–] jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

and they have every right to complain about the government making a half decent one into a horrible one

[–] kurwa@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

And normal people have a right to not care about people leeching off of actual workers.

And if you're talking about homeowners, I still don't care. You don't deserve imaginary free money for owning land. Its for living in, not an investment.

Go buy some stocks and stop being selfish.

[–] knatschus@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Then lift the freeze once there's no profit left anymore, or just keep the freeze for existing buildings. Limit the rent increase etc.

[–] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 months ago (4 children)

The issue here is, and this has happened before, investors will either sell the property, meaning those not in a position to buy are screwed, or they will do the bare minimum to keep the building functioning, as there is no incentive to improve the building.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 2 months ago

investors will either sell the property

Good. Investors rather than inhabitants owning homes is a huge part of why rent and property prices have skyrocketed.

they will do the bare minimum to keep the building functioning

They already do that in order to maximize profits.

there is no incentive to improve the building.

Ever heard of this new thing called laws and regulations? It's the only "incentive" that actually DOES work to correct the behavior of greedy slumlords.

Letting them keep increasing the already obscenely high rents just means more profits for them in return for no benefit for anyone else.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago (2 children)
[–] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That sounds like it's solving the problem, then.

[–] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If you can afford to buy a property, sure.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

How would somebody buy it if nobody could afford it?

[–] ijedi1234@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The banks, of course. They'll buy anything.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

And what do they do with that investment?

[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 7 points 2 months ago

Sell to Aquaman.

[–] ijedi1234@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

Oh, that's very simple. Warehousing! They need storage space for their gold, and their typical warehouses aren't big enough to hold it all.

[–] pr0xy_prime@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

They already only do the bare minimum. You practically have to take your landlord to court to get any meaningful fixes in your apartment. All new developments are built like shit, developers cut corners anywhere they can. After the building is built the developer "vanishes" so there isn't anyone to sue when there is something seriously wrong with the building. They just open a new throw away LLC later and put up another shit building. You must not live in NYC

[–] Mnemnosyne@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Problem easily solved. Is a building not being utilized? Seize it and pay the owner fair market value, then have the city administrate it and charge just enough rent to cover expenses of maintenance and improvement and administration.

[–] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

So why not skip the rent control and go straight to this?

[–] Mnemnosyne@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

To give the current owners the chance to do the right thing, and make a small but reasonable gain from their property.

And to make it more palatable to the general public. It's a lot easier to convince people to go along with it if you're seizing empty unused properties that are only empty and unused because the owner refuses to rent them if they're not making excessive profit.

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Fair market value is much, much lower 9n rent controlled property

[–] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Yeah, a government deliberately lowering property values so they can buy them cheap isn't a great precedent.

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 3 points 1 month ago

Won't somebody think of Blackrock?

[–] _AutumnMoon_@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's not great, It's fantastic. Let the scumbags who own property they don't use lose money!

thale same strategy will be used to build more freeways through low income neighborhoods

[–] kurwa@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago