Home Ownership

[Gatordash]

Originally Posted by Ooloo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I love how everyone thinks landlords are these cartoonish rich fat cat evil guys twirling their mustaches and raking in money. The majority of landlords are middle class and have one rental property that they are using to help pay off the mortgage on their own house. People who claim to care about the poor really just hate the rich. They are two very distinct, different things.

Its about what you can portray as a politician to stay in power. Democrats seem to be doing a great job of their, 'rich people need to pay their fair share' campaign even though they will never make the rich pay more. This housing moratorium is a perfect example where mom and pop landlords are losing everything they've worked for while the large residential investment firm stays afloat and gets to pick up the pieces at a discount when the moratorium washes out. Its pretty genius misdirection because the reality is you are taking from the middle class to give to the rich who fund your political campaigns, but you can sell it politically as rich vs poor.

[Rick Sanchez]

cant wait to take advantage of the people losing there homes soon.

[Jibartik]

This is a great quote and I think it holds true:

When the economy has been reduced to private ownership, the increased productivity of labor only increases rent, thus all the advantages of progress goes to those that own land. Wages do not increase, wages cannot increase.

The more labor produces: The more it must pay for the opportunity to make anything at all.

I dont think land should be profitable or owned. Rent control: YES! but rent control against the goverment landlord instead of the person landlord.

Ive been both a renter in a major city with rent control, and a home owner, and I felt the same exact level of pride of ownership in both situations.

[Thorgrimm]

Originally Posted by Jibartik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is a great quote and I think it holds true:



I dont think land should be profitable or owned. Rent control: YES! but rent control against the goverment landlord instead of the person landlord.

Ive been both a renter in a major city with rent control, and a home owner, and I felt the same exact level of pride of ownership in both situations.

If you own your own land you can grow your own food and be self sufficient

[Jibartik]

Originally Posted by Thorgrimm [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If you own your own land you can grow your own food and be self sufficient

You still pay a mortage so that's rent, just to a bank instead of the gov, the bank owns a deed to the land granted to them by the gov, like a renters conteract.

if the gov would ever take an individuals land, they would also take the banks.

So there is no difference.

Except in the current system the banks make all the money while the land owner pays inflated prices that they must desperately beg people to pay for their crops's inflated prices to make up for.

It's a death spiral.

If you rented the land from the gov and got rid of the banks, nothing would change but you'd have less inflation, and would worry about the quality of your crops and your time and enjoyment... cropping(?) them...

A key component is understanding that owning a renters contract is the same as owning a mortgage or deed, when you have that, it's a lock until you want to get rid of it.

There is a 1:1 similarity between a renters contract with the goverment as a mortage with the bank, except its about 10,000% cheaper [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Thorgrimm]

Originally Posted by Jibartik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You still pay a mortage so that's rent, just to a bank instead of the gov, the bank owns a deed to the land granted to them by the gov, like a renters conteract.

if the gov would ever take an individuals land, they would also take the banks.

So there is no difference.

Except in the current system the banks make all the money while the land owner pays inflated prices that they must desperately beg people to pay for their crops's inflated prices to make up for.

It's a death spiral.

If you rented the land from the gov and got rid of the banks, nothing would change but you'd have less inflation, and would worry about the quality of your crops and your time and enjoyment... cropping(?) them...

A key component is understanding that owning a renters contract is the same as owning a mortgage or deed, when you have that, it's a lock until you want to get rid of it.

There is a 1:1 similarity between a renters contract with the goverment as a mortage with the bank, except its about 10,000% cheaper [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Private Property Rights are the foundation of Freedom

Read Locke, Madison and Jefferson

[HalflingSpergand]

Originally Posted by Thorgrimm [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If you own your own land you can grow your own food and be self sufficient

Got proof?

[Thorgrimm]

Originally Posted by HalflingSpergand [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Got proof?

https://www.landwatch.com/

[Whale biologist]

Originally Posted by Thorgrimm [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

https://www.landwatch.com/

Less than half an acre. Great website.

FOR CLOWNS!!

[Castle2.0]

Don't miss the thread on HODLing crypto til 2024+. I can't wait to tell all the negative ned's and ne'erdogoods "i told you so" [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]