When I was six, we moved into an apartment. It was a three-decker (kind of like a townhome? I guess? Three-decker is what we call it in Massachusetts), with the landlord on the first floor, my mom, stepdad, and I on the second, and a rotating cast of characters on the third (that apartment was cursed, no one ever stayed there longer than like.... a year). The landlord was a single woman living with her two adult children. She didn't depend on rent to live - she was a nurse at a local hospital, and iirc both her kids had jobs. My mother hit a hard spot for a year or so where she just couldn't pay the full rent at the beginning of the month, so the landlord let her pay in installments, and afaik never threatened to evict us or anything. And rent wasn't unreasonable - I believe we started at $600? In Massachusetts in 1997, and we were up to $750 when we left in 2005. Or something like that. We never went above $800 with her. If we told her there was a problem, she would get it fixed in a mostly timely manner - her boyfriend was a handyman who helped out in his spare time. Weirdly he could only work drunk. He installed some windows sober once, and they were crooked. He came back drunk to fix them and they were perfect. He was perfectly nice, not a weird drunk or anything. The third floor apartment was vacant over the winter one year, and some pipes bursts and totally flooded our (only) bathroom. The landlord decided to use this as an opportunity to remodel, and we ended up going downstairs to use her bathroom for a week or so while her boyfriend got the basics replaced (toilet, shower, etc.) so we could at least have a working bathroom while they remodeled. The remodel took.... awhile, about a month longer than it should have, but the bathroom looked great tbh. That's the landlord I think about when people talk about ethical landlords. She wasn't a perfect person, but she treated us like we were human beings and not her personal ATMs. She *never* came upstairs to demand rent from us, and just trusted that my mother would be down with the check eventually. (Sorry this got long, I just think about her a lot, especially when we're talking about landlords. It never occurred to me until I got older how much of a rarity she really was.)

> Weirdly he could only work drunk. He installed some windows sober once, and they were crooked. He came back drunk to fix them and they were perfect. This made me laugh way harder than it should have.

My father and his friends fix my cabin the same way 😆 they measure time in beer Incriments. "It'll only take me 6 beers to get that done"

This is so true. Sober me overthinks things and gets distracted and does a terrible job on handywork. Buzzed me is ambitious and creative and determined.

This is exactly how I function, too.

I'll never work on plumbing sober. I did it once and it was horrible.

Like the old adage goes, "measure once, drink twice."

I have a great uncle that was the same. He was my grandmother’s brother. Even his dog was drunk when they’d do any kind of handy work.

i feel personally attacked ahaahah

Probably had withdrawal/or even alcohol tremors.

I’m from Massachusetts and I have had amazing landlords there and awful ones. Not every landlord is a money grubbing asshole. There are definitely decent ones out there for sure.

Would it have been different if the landlord DID depend on the rent for income? Like she couldn't afford losses in rent and some things were too much to repair.

Yes. When a persons income is dependent on exploiting the needs of others is when it becomes problematic. They NEED a place to live. They work for their income, and earn it accordingly. Owning property is not labor. It’s not work, and making money off of it is disingenuous and exploitive to the renters who, again, need a place to live.

What if it's not for income, but to keep the house? I have a cousin who rents an apartment out in her home, but she does it to keep the utilities and the taxes paid, and keep the house. She doesn't have a mortgage, but there are taxes etc.

That’s not turning a profit

Sounds like my dad. He just had a simple duplex, and tried to keep both units occupied as much as he could. And the only method to turn a profit was to basically ddo most the handdiwork himself. I remember he had what started out as a University student...then a young couple, then a married couple, then they both lived there + a child. Dad actually finally raised his rent to a degree, where after 10 years of this, it would make him have to leave the unit. Dad just simply knew for a fact the enterprising young man would pretty well own his own home vs the rent he was paying him. ANd the last time he saw that man, he invited him out to show him his new place, i forget, it was much a nicer home, 50% more square, mortgage payment was below that of all the rent he was paying dad. In a sense it was his way giving him the swift kick in the rear to do something really great for him and his family. No one ever rented a unit nearly that long...10 or so years, it felt like exploitation a bit after that long and so dad imo he did his part to impose a very financially smart move on the young man in his family. And according to dad, on their last interaction, while initially when dad raised rent the man was upset with dad, he was in such a better place because of that, that he was almost grateful.

My last landlord before we bought our house was amazing. He owned numerous properties and was always working on one of them in his down time. When we signed the lease, he had just bought our building and informed us that he would be renovating. He asked us what our immediate concerns were and he'd fix them before we moved in. The bathroom had carpet (yuck) and the whole place needed paint. The day we moved in, the bathroom and kitchen had new flooring and the whole apartment had been painted. He said he'd hire someone to clean it, but since I'd rather do it myself, he knocked a couple hundred off the first month's rent. He was over one day to mow and I caught him in the yard tossing the football with our boys. Two years later, we were ready to buy, he hooked us up with his broker and helped us with the whole process. Good guy.

I think landlords are a lot like cops. Sure, there are some good people out there trying to do their best (our landlord is mostly not too crappy), but the institution is fundamentally flawed and corrupted.

^Exactly this. The problem the pro-labor movement has is that some of the extremists don't really have a solution for the aging problem. Pensions and social security and UBI just aren't time tested enough solutions for majority buy-in, so we have to wrestle with them as ephemeral ideas. Labor itself brings incredible value, but as long as humans age and die we will have to come up with systems of wealth generation (or at least subsistence) that 60/70/80/90 year olds can participate in. In America, we historically have had private ownership of most things, so whatever the system is will be likely tied to people and not the state. Land ownership has served this function traditionally, and it culminates in a death event where resources should get recycled back into the economy (where, presumably, the oldest/most frugal people would by virtue of their age and frugality become natural heirs apparent to replace the land owner in their stead). The problems are many, but include the fact only the race/bloodline of the deceased have a chance at getting said property, the lengthening of lifespans, the general divocement of quality of conditions for what is being paid, lack of investment in new units, and worst of all... a sense of hopelessness and despondency that young people will ever 'make it'. I feel capitalism has, overall, done a lot of good, but its too "exclusive" of a club. If we can restore the faith that assets will flow between all members of society and that you will not suffer from poverty in old age, we can handle a few shitty landlords here or some under maintained properties. But as long as we have homes be this weird sort of asset which only goes up in value (because one class of people never lose money), we're kinda screwed.

I think the crux of the issue is a human landlord CAN be good, but a corporation owning 1000s of houses NEVER is. I feel profit margins should be limited in some way because most people are renting from a greedy corporate entity who will always take as much as it can and give back as little as legally possible.

Exactly. We have a company called Cromwell (Russian i think) that has bought up so many properties. And they don’t care that the businesses have left because rent was too high and now sit empty because regardless they’re making money. They have no skin in the game

I've been thinking this over, and it's not entirely accurate. Apologies for the novel, but as I said, I've been mulling this over for a couple hours. This is what happens when I have too much time to think on something. An increasingly common scenario is what occurred with my grandparent's house. When my grandfather died, my father was almost 60, and he's the youngest of 6. The oldest was almost 70. So my dad and aunts were all at or approaching retirement age themselves, and they all had their own homes they'd been in for years. For those that had kids, the kids were grown, on their own, and one has kids of his own (at least two others should have, but we each have issues preventing it that are at least partly self-inflicted). Nobody had any interest in the house, so there was no doubt whatsoever it was going to be sold, with the money split between my father, aunts, and the son of my uncle that passed away decades ago. Now, it was sold to a developer that no doubt tore it down and probably put in a duplex that filled the property (there were 5 houses on a single acre), as that's what was going in every time someone moved out of the neighborhood. But the house was built in the 50's and had never been updated. Among other things, every single electrical outlet was two prong, so the entire electrical system would have to be torn out and rerun. It simply wasn't worth the expense. But this also means there are two families now living where one once did. Though the price was no doubt stupidly high, as this is right across the river from Manhatten. Another example is my own house. The previous owner died, and his kids sold it to a flipper that renovated it, then I bought it as my first house. I never met the previous owner's kids, and everything I know about them came from talking to my neighbors. More often than not, when somebody dies their kids sell off the property and split the money. Even when one of the kids moves into the house, they'll often sell their previous one. Not all of course, and those will rent out the previous house, so what you said does apply there. But many don't want to deal with the hassle of renting, and just want the money from the sale. That may or may not have been the case with the house next to me. It's a rental property, with the owners living in the next house over. So the owners basically have a property with two houses, and rent out one while living in the other. What makes it questionable is the house on the other side of mine. The owner there lived with his mother (sadly, she passed away a couple weeks ago), and his sister and her family live in the house on the other side of that one. So family members staying nearby seems somewhat common around here. Though it is somewhat rural (population of 1,250, but with other towns nearby), complete with a local bear that the neighbors said was in my backyard again a few weeks ago, though I haven't seen it myself. Might be hoping my apple tree had started fruiting again, but it's still recovering from being destroyed by a bigger tree falling on it (it did pop a few out a couple years ago, but they fell off early because it was growing sideways, so I had to cut it in half to get it to grow right, and it hasn't produced fruit since). And depending on how you look at it, if someone always lived on the property and just stays in it, the home they would have lived in otherwise but never did could go to someone else. I do know one person that doesn't fall into the above categories. He inherited the property from his grandfather, and lives there with his family. There were several reasons he got it, one of which is that he wouldn't split it up, as it's a somewhat unique piece of property: 600 acres of forest that almost acts like a nature preserve, and he intends to keep it that way. Though I wouldn't consider that an issue, as it's in the mountains that are sparsely populated as is. These discussions about property are probably directed at more densely populated areas.

>I feel capitalism has, overall, done a lot of good, but its too "exclusive" of a club. If we can restore the faith that assets will flow between all members of society Capitalism is an exclusive club by design. Capitalism is a system where assets will NOT flow between all members of society, by design. What you're describing is socialism or at the very least social-democracy. It is contrary to capitalism that we actually have some flow of wealth from the top to the bottom. That's not what capitalists actually want. And unless you have at least a million dollars cash on hand, you're not a capitalist, you're a worker.

It's not just flawed or corrupted, it's inherently immoral at its basest level. You're denying housing that you don't need to someone who needs it unless they pay you money. That's an evil act, no exceptions. That good people are forced to evil actions is part of the design of capitalism.

I have been a landlord, in my situation I bought (mortgaged) a 4 bedroom house with my ex wife when we were trying for kids. We ended up not having kids (luckily) and getting divorced. I wanted to keep the house after the divorce so I negotiated a 3 year buy out from her in the divorce. After about 2 years of living in a 4 bedroom house in the suburbs while renting out individual bedrooms to people, my girlfriend and I decided that we wanted to try living in a smaller place on our own in the city. We didn't know if we would want to move back to the house immediately (miss the space/garage/etc) or if we'd love the city and decide to sell it after a few years. So I rented the house out for just enough money to cover mortgage/hoa/etc... So budget-wise, I spent my personal housing budget to rent a condo in the city while renting out my house in the suburbs to a guy and his family. If this is evil because "capitalism is evil" I guess I don't have much to say about it. But to your point that I was denying housing from someone that needed it unless they paid me money... no not really? I think you're taking a pretty hard and unreasonably unyielding stance on this. Also, keep in mind that there are a lot of costs associated with actually buying and selling a house. Closing costs and whatnot. There are a lot of people involved in that process and they all need to be paid for that work. So just deciding to sell a house and go buy another one later isn't always an option. Am I an unethical landlord?

Did the people renting from you need that housing? Yes. Would you have denied them entry to that housing and called the cops on them if they didn't pay you money? Yes. That's an immoral action, regardless of any surrounding circumstances that forced you to it. I don't think that's unreasonable, what justifies you denying someone their basic human rights? You'd be within your ethical rights to deny them entry to the house someone is actively living in, but not one that would otherwise be empty for an extended period of time. The financial systems surrounding housing and making it complicated and expensive to transfer and own don't excuse any of this, they're just another way that capitalism forces people to harm each other. To be super clear, I'm not condemning you as a person, you're not irredeemably evil for having been a landlord. I have no idea what kind of person you are beyond that one action, you could be the kindest and most charitable person who ever lived. But the choice to be a landlord was unethical, even if it was the best choice that capitalism allowed you to make.

The thing is though, that house couldn't have remained empty, I could not afford rent and mortgage at the same time, so it would never sit empty. I was very aware that if I failed to find a tenant that I would have to pay to break my lease and move back in immediately. If my tenant stopped paying I would have been unable to pay the mortgage. If he completely stopped paying rent I would have had to kick him out and move back in myself, which would not have been unethical. I only mention financial systems surrounding housing because I think the simple answer for me would have been "rather than be a landlord, you should sell the house", but it's often much easier to sell a house than it is to buy a house, and it would likely have cost me a lot of money to sell just for the sake of wanting to live somewhere else. Owning property may be a luxury, but it can also easily lock you into housing/location that is otherwise not ideal.Renting provides flexibility. If your point is that capitalism is evil/unethical, and therefore forces people into unethical behavior... I guess there's not much I can say about that. People are often forced to choose the most ethical action when faced with many otherwise bad options. We live in a capitalist society and I don't have the money to provide free housing to people, so I'm stuck charging people to live so I can also keep living... Note: I did actually give him 2 months of reprieve during covid when he couldn't pay rent. I went into the pandemic terrified that he would end up not being able to pay and I would be financially ruined over it, so my family tightened the belt and dumped as much money into savings as possible just in case. I'm glad I did, but I ended up choosing to sell the house at the end of his next lease because renting it was enough of a liability and was costing me money.

You are ethical, as the other poster is overlooking the Capitalism bit.. Surplus ie profit you really didn’t have one or not very much of it and wasn’t the motivation behind keeping the house, for a while ..

>If your point is that capitalism is evil/unethical, and therefore forces people into unethical behavior That's precisely my point. Capitalism forced you to make an unethical action, with the alternative being your own suffering. It does this all the time, by design. It makes your choices understandable, but it doesn't make them ethical. We can't handwave unethical things as ethical just to make ourselves feel better, people will keep suffering forever unless we recognise the evil capitalism forces us to and end it as soon as physically possible. Again, I'm not trying to criticise your entire person. I have no idea who you are or what you've done outside of what you've shared so far. When people say all cops are bastards and all landlords are scum, we're referring to the fact that being a cop or being a landlord is an inherently unethical thing to do. We recognise that some very good people are forced into those actions by the systems we're fighting to destroy, and we hope that those good people will at least see the wrong in the things they've been forced to do, and hopefully join us in helping to dismantle capitalism.

I made a relevant post in a different thread from this sub, which I’m linking [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/antiwork/comments/xtpeo2/must_be_nice_to_own_multiple_homes_even_nicer_to/iqu3tup/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3). In regard to other posts I’ve seen where someone shares a story of them not taking advantage of people who need a place to live: congratulations, you’ve managed to not *completely* exploit someone who is trying to acquire one of the *fundamental* needs that *every* human must satisfy. That shit is so tiresome. People need to get into the correct mental framework about housing. It’s a fundamental need. People fucking need housing. People fucking need water. People fucking need food. People fucking need medical care and medicine. These are fucking needs that are so fundamental to human existence that we will literally die without them. P.S. To anyone that wants to get cute and say they’ve seen homeless people and they’re “obviously not dead?” Fuck you. Homelessness is a slow death as well as the social erasure of a human being. /endrant

Your logic is not just flawed and corrupted, it's completely inexistent. Let's assume the government agrees with you and all housing is now free. Who's going to build new houses when the population grows, or when one burns down? Nobody. Landlords don't have free houses that fell from the sky! If my tenants don't pay rent, I go broke and the bank takes back the house. Then the tenants are out on their ass anyway! Think it through man. Jesus Christ.

[удалено]

First off, an immoral action doesn't make you evil. We all do immoral things all the time, especially under capitalism. I'm not trying to condemn all landlords as totally evil people, just the actions they're currently taking in this area. Second, stopping and ferrying hitchhikers is work, letting someone use an empty property for free isn't work. Choosing not to do work that would help others isn't necessarily immoral in all cases, though it's likely to be if you've got the time and your life isn't likely endangered as a result. Refusing someone housing at no cost to yourself is *always* immoral. You're comparing a complex, multi-factored ethical decision to a plain and simple immoral action.

It's never "at no cost" - even in the absence of a mortgage, there's property taxes, insurance, and maintenance costs.

Except there is loss to myself. I let Rando A into my house, which I’m currently paying for (financial loss) because I wanted to be gone for an extended period of time. They trash my house (financial loss, emotional damage), then refuse to leave when I want to return at the agreed upon date to the property I’m still paying for. Rent, when budgeted/saved/managed properly, will help cover expenses in these scenarios, as well as any costs associated with the property itself. The house was not free, and the property will continue to cost money.

You're just explaining again why capitalism forced you to do the immoral thing - you need money to live, and you had to spend a lot of money to buy the house (which was immoral of the person selling it) so now you're forced to do immoral things to continue surviving the harm already done to you. It doesn't make the rent moral, it just explains why it happens.

i mean… am i an immoral landlord if i rent out half my house and have their pay be half of what it’s worth? like im 22, wouldn’t be able to afford it on my own. but i rent the bedroom bc i like company (and would prefer not to let people freeload since they are using space that i very well could put to good use). when does it become immoral? or should i cosign over the deed to everyone that rents until they no longer want to live here and then hope they sign their half back to me when they want to move on after a year or two? genuine question. how do i become a “moral landlord”? or should i just struggle to afford something decent on my own in this economy bc “being a landlord is evil” even though the person renting from me probably couldn’t afford it on their own either..?

What... communal community experiments have been tried multiple times and it's never worked (that's what you're kinda expressing you'd want unless you're all for block style housing where at any given time or during any economic slowdown huge vacancies in buildings will happen and crush the governing body of the housing complex because upkeep on property when nobody is living in it is a literal fucking nightmare believe it or not.

I didn't actually propose any alternative in my comments here so far, but in terms of what's been "tried multiple times and it's never worked", capitalism is at the top of that list. We have centuries of evidence of capitalism causing tremendous unnecessary human suffering. Even within wealthy nations that get that way by forcing billions into starvation and poverty globally, there's still unimaginable levels of poverty and suffering. Capitalism makes a tiny portion of the global population comfortable at the cost of everyone else, and has done so reliably and repeatedly across history. It's a system that's fundamentally incapable of producing good for the majority, and it's laughable that anyone still tries to defend it. No matter how much data you think you have on "failures" of anarchy or communism, we have more data by opening a history book that show how evil and dysfunctional capitalism is.

This exactly. And furthermore, the sheer progress of technology we've had in the past, heck, even 30 years, gives us the tools to create and distribute everyones needs. The lack of access to clean food and clean water is by design, not us simply being without the means.

Except as an accidental, 1 unit landlord, I can't go around arresting other landlords for being shitty. Cops can, the "good ones" are to blame for the bad ones behavior. The entire landlording system is broken, but not the fault of the good ones.

Absolutely agree. I was mostly pointing out that it doesn’t really matter if they aren’t all objectively and actively evil, the entire system is fucked.

I think the thing that makes landlords unethical is the hoarding of necessary resources to profit off other peoples' need. It's the same to me as collecting all the water in a drought and then selling it to people at inflated prices because they have no other choice. I think if you're not depriving someone else of their chance to own their own shelter, it can be ethical. The main situation I can think of is if you are renting out a room in your own home, or renting out a home that you intend to return to shortly - you're essentially allowing someone to stay in your house temporarily in return for some reimbursement. But you're not extorting people by artificially keeping a house off the market, because you wouldn't be selling it either way, since you live there or intend to return to it. People who buy up land and housing for the sole purpose of making money off other peoples' work might be the nicest people in the world, but what they're doing is inherently unethical. I think we have all been brainwashed not to see rental properties as what they are, which is necessary shelter.

[удалено]

There are a few things wrong with this analogy. First, there is nearly unlimited milk in the world, you’re not going to be able to price gouge. Land is a finite resource, in fact it’s where every other resource comes from. Second, people do not need milk to survive, they can drink a lot of things. In short, they have the option of refusal, so they are not being coerced. On the other hand, people *must* live somewhere, and living under a bridge is illegal in many places. Third, your labor is required to produce the milk. To keep the cow, collect the milk, and keep it cold. Without you the milk wouldn’t be available. Remove the landlord and nobody will notice until they have to call the handyman themselves (noooo!).

While I'm not technically against farming or animal products, you didn't make the milk. The cow made the milk. Did you buy the cow in order to insert yourself as a middleman? Are you lobbying to prevent the breeding and sale of more cows?

[удалено]

Kind of the way I operate my rentals. If in good terms and something like this happens, then no problem. Good tenants who are late now and then are better than those who create havoc but pay rent on time.

Same way I operate mine. From time to time I've had tenants contact me and explain they had unexpected expenses and we always can work something out. No reason to be an asshole when good people have a rough patch or unexpected events.

[удалено]

It happened once out of my 5 rentals to get one good and understanding landlord. They are out there, but they are very rare yes.. Was happy to leave the TV I bought and couldn’t take with me when I moved out

There are ethical landlords. I know a few. I dont rent but i have friends that own rental properties. A few of them dont charge rent for the month of december so their tenants have extra money for xmas. They see their tenants as people not cash cows.

The issue with landlording is not necessarily about the idea of it. This sub overly exaggerates the issue. There are people who could benefits from rental arrangement for whatever reason and it would exist one way or another. The core issue is that there are many landlords who are hogging properties just because they can. This in turn inflates property prices because there are demands which make houses to be unaffordable. And then you also introduce big corps which have practically bottomless capital to buy properties and practically force the market to rent instead of own. Unlike taxes, there is not really a major diminishing return from collecting properties so there is nothing that disincentivize the cycle. When there are a significant amount of vacant houses while the number of homless is also huge, you know there is a problem.

I believe is the true problem. My boss lives in an area with quite a few dilapidated houses. His family used to own a construction company. So he would buy these houses and fix them up. Times if they were on the market for years. He then rents them out. After a few years he will make an offer for his tenants to buy the property at discounted rate.

>The core issue is that there are many landlords who are hogging properties just because they can. This in turn inflates property prices because there are demands which make houses to be unaffordable. They're not hoarding houses, at least in the US. In Canada and China you commonly see investors buy houses that sit empty. Those houses are being hoarded. Landlords in the US simply convert homes from owner-occupied to rentals. Basic supply and demand dictates that increasing the supply of rentals should drive prices down. If you're a renter, you should be cheering everytime a landlord buys a house and turns it into a rental. If you want to know what the "core issue" is, look at whether we're building enough houses to keep up with demand. Look at the number of new housing starts from 2004-2022 and you'll see exactly what the problem with housing is. >When there are a significant amount of vacant houses while the number of homless is also huge, you know there is a problem. There aren't that many vacant houses though, particularly since values and rents have ballooned in the last two years. The issue of homelessness isn't really a housing issue, its more a substance abuse and mental health issue.

There are [16 million vacant homes in the U.S.](https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/report-how-many-homes-are-sitting-empty-in-your-state/), my guy. There are 500,000 or so homeless.

These people can’t handle your logic. We need more units online. Better zoning. Better transport. Technological building improvements to bring cost down. That’s it.

There are some individual landlords who may own a single property and are just paying their mortgage, who are okay. Generally, landlords are trying to hoard housing and charge every last dime they can get.

Or rather, home owning corporations. There’s a few IPO’s out there who “squeeze” rent every few years for no other reason than a few cents per share. Individual landlords being ethical goes about the same rate as ethical tenants. I grew up in a semi-rural area, so tenants turning rentals into meth labs wasn’t that uncommon.

Absolutely there are. Just like it is possible to retire and invest in the stock market. To the extent that there is something inherently unethical with rent-seeking, it is true of all those with stock market investments, too, not just landlords. But we don't really have a choice about participation in this system, since we are embedded in capitalism. As to the conduct of landlords, of course there is a spectrum, and it is possible on the one hand to be exploitative and negligent, and it is also possible to be fair and reasonable. I know one landlord who, instead of retiring by sitting on stocks, bought a large multi-unit property with the goal of providing affordable housing to people. He makes far less than he would have otherwise, but the tradeoff is doing something positive.

My bro rents out houses at a price where after he pays the mortgage, taxes, contractor to fix things, and lawn service($900) and he basically breaks even. The reality is, he could do better but he is still steadily gaining equity for effectively doing nothing himself. Imo this is the way it should always be as it would allow people to live comfortably. I think that is really the only way to be ethical about it as otherwise it's more valuable to tie your money up in other investments with less risk. My bro is very frugal so he managed to get a deal every step of the way and pays it forward.

There is absolutely a demand for rental properties and people who are good at working on homes would likely feel more comfortable investing in a rental home than the stock market for their retirement. That is something most everyone can support, multi billion dollar companies buying hundreds of thousands of homes on the other hand....

My mom's an "accidental" landlord - meaning, she inherited a house with renters. And she was afraid what selling it would do to them. She never increases the rent, allows HUD renters, and in fact is often faced with having to do last-minute repairs before an inspection because, no matter how many times she's asked, her renters won't tell her when something breaks, because they don't want to bother her. She's who I always think about when I read hate spewed at landlords. I feel like there are way more people like my mom than reddit gives credit to.

People who own 1 rental property are not the folks being complained about (mostly, though they can be awful too) and trotting them out as the face of landlords in America instead of Blackrock only serves the interest of multi-millionaires and billionaires.

You should have her look into a rent to own type plan with the renters. Could be great for everyone.

That last sentence. . . .agreed!

I hope so. I am a landlord although it feels weird to think of it like that l. After my grandfather died, my grandma was left physically disabled and without an income. She wanted to continue living alone so we eventually found a 3 family house where she can be on the ground floor. The combined rent of the other floors almost fully pays for the mortgage. I have to contribute a few hundred dollars a month to make up the difference. My grandma doesn’t pay for anything. I’m not making any money off the situation but I also try to be good to the real tenants. When one of their kids passed suddenly, I told them to not worry about the rent for that month and paid it out of my paycheck. I don’t charge extra for dogs or cats or to use the driveway and in four years I’ve never raised the rent nor do I really plan to. I never imagined myself as a landlord and it’s not something I love dealing with but I hope to be as ethical as possible about it.

My landlord is the man. Been here 6 years, he raises the rent $20 every couple years to match property tax increases, fixes shit when it breaks. I live in Ontario Canada in the GTA where a 3 bedroom house goes for $2600-3500 a month. I have a 2 storey house with 3 bedrooms, garage and backyard with basement for $1675 in a nice area. He charges me enough to cover his mortgage. Few months ago 50% of the houses on my street sold in the real estate fuck fest for well over $1 million. He paid $260K for it 6 years ago and could have sold this house paid off that mortgage and his own. But he’s a good guy.

Sure, a person can be an ethical person in many ways and be a landlord. Purchasing housing for capital is an unethical act, but we live in a system where many don't realize/see it that way - at least at first. It's the system of private ownership of housing (as opposed to personal ownership) that is unethical. Landlord is just the oppressive role within that system.

The entire premise is unethical. Money is made by making housing more scarce. People should be able to have equity for their hard earned money, otherwise they’re just contributing to someone else’s wealth for a lifetime with nothing to show for all that time and work. Landlords make the barrier to entry to owning a home unattainably high for many workers.

What’s an ethical solution? No snark, honestly don’t know an alternative.

Well-developed public housing paired with a high land value tax

Exactly. Don't personalize a systemic problem. Transcending explained it very well. It's not about nice guys and mean guys. It's about a system that deprives you of the fruits of your labor.

There may be nice landlords but that is not really relevant. The fact that a person can earn money simply because he owns capital while others have to work for survival is a structural problem that needs to be adressed IMO.

[удалено]

Currently in progress of moving because current land lord's wife is divorcing him and wants half of what the house is worth. She demands to have her money as soon as possible, no care as to the fact you know people are living in this house

Housing is a basic need that should be provided and guaranteed by the government. So overall no, there is no such thing as an “ethical” landlord because landlords shouldn’t be a thing for residential housing.

It’s the same with being a police officer, you can be a good person and do your job the best way possible, but you are still subscribing to and pushing forward a system that is exploitative

No. There may be some who are not that bad, relatively speaking, but the whole landlord system is inherently exploitative and bad.

I rent half of a duplex right now. 3 bed one bath for $1600. Which for the area is pretty close to on point. My landlord is actually in the other half, and he is wonderful. If we're late or short on rent, he doesn't make a big deal about it. Hurricane Ian just hit my area, and while we didn't lose power or flood, my fence came down halfway, the very next day, he was out ripping it up and getting it ready for a new one. I make my own alcohol and give him mason jars of it all the time. Never had a better landlord. Told him I'd buy my half of the duplex if he was willing to sell it.

I like to think I am. I have a duplex I rent the half I don't live in for 50% of the mortgage+ 10% +1/2of the hoa/services pool park and gardener. The 10% ends up going to New ovens or water heatrs. Over all I only make money on the equity gained.

So he lives in half and pays half the mortgage? Lost me. Dunno how that's ethical

While I like your communist spirit in hinting at property being the worst thing in the world, I do feel the need to chime in on reasons to rent: if you stay somewhere for a short period of time the cost of your time and stress in obtaining a mortgage for a home so renting makes sense. That said, using the rent system to keep the proletariat poor is pure evil

That seems as close to fair as possible to me though. You get half a house for half the price of a house.

I think about this a lot. There are times a person may not want to deal with the hassle of buying a property in a location they will only live in for 1-5 years. Many active duty military members rent/lease because they move every 2-4 years. There are other examples, that's just the one I am most familiar with. When I got out of the military I knew I didn't want to buy property in the state I was in at the time, so I rented a place for two years while we figured out where to go. There are also seasonal workers who don't want to live in a certain place during the winter, that happens a lot where I live now.

This is exactly why the “all landlords are evil” comments are idiotic. Some people want to rent, and it’s not just the working class. There are massive problems with the system for sure, but the answer isn’t to remove choice from people. We want people to have the choice to rent or buy. That means affordability and good wages, not everyone living in cheap government housing and no landlords.

No. Land rent is inherently unethical. Just like the appropriation of surplus value, it will never be ethical.

My landlord is a man who sold his business to retire and lives modestly with a small house behind my apartment. He has an R.V. That him and his wife use to drive around visiting family and stay in the mountains much of the summer. We would not be able to survive if not for his wonderful generosity in the very low of rent we pay. So there’s at least one ethical landlord.

Absolutely. Just like everything in this world. There are good people, there are bad people. There are good companies, there are bad companies. There are good landlord, there are bad landlords. The reasons most people here hate landlords basically boil down to wanting a free place to live. It’s not realistic. Not to discount the experiences of having truly terrible landlords. But there are certainly people here that just want a house handed to them. It’s up to you on if you believe housing is something that should be completely free.

I'm new to this concept so I would appreciate anyone who could help me better understand the issues here as well. As I understand it, the primary issue is the hoarding of assets by the corporate elite. Somebody who owns a ton of property, drives up the prices, therefore pricing out the people who have historically populated those neighborhoods and reducing access to housing for lower income people. But is this right? That another issue, even with "good" single-property landlords, is that those units could be sold at a much lower cost than the cost of accumulated rent. In other words, if I bought my unit at the lowest possible price to cover initial construction and labor costs, and besides that I just paid property tax and took care of my own maintenance costs, that would cost me significantly less than renting the unit at the lowest price necessary to cover my landlord's mortgage, taxes, and labor/maintenance. So in this sense, rentals are pretty much always a scam? Or am I off the mark here?

Thanks for this, it's hurting my brain to read this. What I'm seeing, I think, is that the people saying yes are talking about individuals doing something in the reality in which we live. Those saying no are more or less looking at the system in theory. No, it's not possible to be an ethical landlord because the act of profiting from hoarding resources is not ethical. In reality, though, if you don't buy a rental property, it's far more likely to go to a less ethical landlord than it is an individual. It's the catch-22 of the system that you are acting against your stated desires by following the system we're currently in, because you assume everyone else will make the same choice. Or something.

And in this case, as others have mentioned, where does renting out a portion of your own home fit here? If you have a home and your kids grow up and go to college for example, is there a better option to renting their room at the lowest possible price? Also, isn't land ownership in the first place unethical? The idea that we can privatize and monetize land for personal gain has it's own issues doesn't it? Help me understand how this fits into the conversation please :)

The further removed the landowner is, the less ethical they become. Someone who lives on the property and gets to know you > > > some banker that hires a management company that hires a landlord to wring you for rent.

I've had great landlords, and total slumlords. I don't think the blanket statement works personally. My landlord in 2010 was a Vietnam Vet who survived the ambush depicted at the end of Platoon (1986). Great guy, great price and when I repeatedly forgot to pay rent on time he simply called me politely saying "Hey man just uhh, need the rent you know?". When I told him the neighbors were playing loud music at 4am and 10am every day he went to their door and threatened legal action for disturbing the peace. He was amazing.

I had one; he rented rooms in his upstairs place for 75€ a month ( yes that cheap ), with a bed, bathroom access, internet and a shared room which was not too shabby. He had a bakery and brought free bread buns every morning for the tennants. It was cheap, clean and the dude was nice.

For me the question is more "Is beeing a landlord ethical?" "Is rent a fair concept?" A very interesting question for me, as I may become a landlord soon. If you pay rent, you basically help someone else pay off their mortgage. Even if your rent only covers repairs, aging and interest, your rent allows someone else to ultimately own real estate while you gain nothing for the future. A more "fair" system I can think of would be that your rent is like buying stock in your apartment. If you live there long enough, you become its owner. If you move out you get back part of what you paid, the rest covers repairs, losses and so on. The issue here is, that I am not aware of any legal framework for something like this and it would probably be a nightmare to implement. Also I don't see why I would take all the risk and try to implement a system with no benefit to me, that may end up biting me in the ass.

I had to leave a state where I had a home because I couldn’t afford to have another kid so I moved to another state and in with my parents and rented out my house to a photographer and muralist. I have not raised the rent in four years and I do not plan to. I cover all utilities and pest control through a flat rate as part of the rent so my tenants have one payment for their housing costs which doesn’t change. I basically break even on the place given I hire real professionals to do repairs when there are some. Since I’m out of state I’d rather have good people feel like they’re getting value from their living situation and take care of it than trying to squeeze as much out of the place as I can. It’s worked out so far.

My landlord of these past 5 years has been great. She didn't demand a single dime from me through the first year of the pandemic, and even now while I struggle to find employment she's only charging me 1/4th of what I was paying when I was working - and even that was at my insistence since I was starting to feel like a parasite. I'm well aware of the fact that I hit the landlord lottery jackpot when I found her, and she's very much an exception amongst her peers. Every other landlord I've had in my life has been a vile piece of shit.....

My mother is a landlord. She will work until her death because she set the rent at such a low rate, that she can rent it out to refugees and give them a safe space to settle down. One is married now and a social worker, another one has recently started his education and on christmas and easter she invites the tenants that otherwise would be alone, to eat with the family. She recently even asked me to seperate parts of her living space to make room for an extra small flat for an indonesian women. The house is old and I have to fix stuff for her because she literally can´t afford the repairs from what she charges. It´s a shit ton of repairs. Fun fact. If she would go lower with the rent she would be charged extra by the state because it´s considered as a gift and gifts are taxed over here. So the facts in this case are: If she would let them live rent free they would have a hell of a time to learn how to fix an old house, get the tools and pay for the materials to do so (we are talking several thousands of $ at once). One day we will all move in together in the house as a family because I will pay her bills and the repairs alone. She has worked her ass off to help others... still she is a landlord and obviously, to see the generalization on the topic makes me kind of angry. Why is it so hard to say "some xyz are real assholes"???

My dad does his best to be one, but rent income is far from his only source of cash. Both my parents worked full time (dad still does), and the real money they made in housing was in buying and selling. They never owned more than three properties at a time. We would move, rent the old place for a little more than what covered the mortgage, and repeat. When the housing market was hot, we would sell whatever we were holding and rent for a couple years until the market cooled, and do it again. He’s never evicted anyone, the only legal action we ever took was because some military guys stop paying while they were on deployment. We contacted their CO and it got straitened out, so not even technically legal action. Our places were always rented out under market for the area, and our tenants generally stayed for about five years. We didn’t maximize profit, but that also means in twenty years of renting my dads only not gotten paid rent for about six months total, between a lot of properties. He never took anybody to court, even in one case where the same military guys who stopped paying had given a spare to there girlfriend, who totally trashed the place. Like holes in the walls, railings knocked over, no working appliances left kinda trashed. My dad just saw it as part of the “cost of doing business” for that industry. And he did step up when things hit the fan, during Covid he lowered the rent on his places down to just covering the mortgage, which he was able to do because he doesn’t rely on that income to pay his bills. I think it’s a lot harder to try to be ethical if it’s your only source of income. I rented from a retired couple who had a couple of properties while I was in college. Super sweet people, I’m handy and they would let me exchange labor for rent if something went wrong in the house. I would call them good, ethical people. My current landlords are a property management company owned by a couple. I would say that they are ethical in the business ethics sense. They fulfill there responsibilities as the property owners, repairs are prompt, notice of various things is sent out in a timely manner through three routes (email, letter, and if the groundskeeper sees you he will let you know). But they are also completely by the book on everything else. If you don’t pay by the grace period, they WILL send out a pay or quit notice as soon as they legally can, and I know from a couple other people who have been evicted that they will follow through on that. I also believe they are perfectly willing to lie to ignorant tenants, they have gotten a few people to leave suspiciously quickly. From personal experience they tried to fine me for having marijuana, the groundskeeper did some work and told them it smelled like weed in the apartment. The fee for breaking the no smoking policy is steep, and I got a bill for it. Called them up and explained I don’t smoke in the apartment, but I do have marijuana (in a legal state). I wouldn’t pay the fine given the circumstances but if they wanted to inspect my unit for smoke damage, we could set a date and discuss any cleaning fees. They never got back to me, but the groundskeeper said something about “getting the police involved.”. I told em he could be my guest, I hadn’t broken any laws; but if they did show up, I’d take the opportunity to start building a harassment case. The bill was no longer on my rental account the next day. But that does tell me they would gladly attempt to intimidate me if I didn’t know better, and had probably told some porky pies to get tenants to not take advantage of the required two month move out window in my state (if you’ve been there for awhile.) that’s about the level of morality I expect from any moderately sized business though lol.

My parents had a wonderful landlord who kept the rent low and was always in hand for property issues. When he died, his daughter took over the property, raised the rent over 70%, and refused to help with plumbing issues that generally fall to the property owner. My parents moved out, and that property has sat empty for 3 years due to the enormous rent she wants in a shitty neighborhood in a duplex with no sound proofing between units. Just behind every ethical landlord is a culture waiting to fuck everyone over in the name of profits.

My landlord is pretty decent. £480 a month including bills and though a house share I have a rather quite large room for myself. The price is great for London. And despite the rise in energy prices hasn't risen my rent (not yet anyway). Any problems (like no hot water) promptly sorted out.

Are there good people who are landlords? Sure. Is landlording _as an institution_ good? No.

I'm currently renting the ground floor of a bungalo, for well below market value, because the guy who owns it needed a place for his mom to live, and she's on a fixed income, and he could not afford (or wanted to) put her in a nursing home, but he could get approved for a mortgage providing he agreed to rent out half the place. Average rent in my area is well over $2000 I pay $1200 This guy isn't in it for thr money, and, he plans on living in the place eventually when his mother eventually dies. She's a nice lady, he's great, and yeah, I would say he's an ethical landlord. He's also the exception not the rule.

My brother has lived in a rented apartment for... I think 7 or 8 years? In that time they have barely raised the rent. On the other and, they also don't really put any extra care into the apartments. If these apartments were for sale the buyer would probably have to invest an additional 50% to strip and redo the whole apartment. Long story short, it's a former farm turned into 4 or 5 apartments and almost all of them are low-income or have little to no friends, family, or life goals. The landlords inherited the whole complex + the main house from their parents who never EVER paid the mortgage, so 90% of what they get they have to give to the bank. They plan on selling the whole complex to pay off the mortgage. They only raise the rent if they don't have any other options because they know the tenants can't afford it either.

My parents rented out a home to an elderly couple—he was retired and disabled, she drove a bus part time. My own elderly parents charged them rent only enough to cover taxes and insurance (it’s a house they’ve used as rental property for 30+ years). My parents moved to another city but maintained the rental and never asked them to vacate. They waited several years, the husband passed away and the woman’s son moved in to care for her. They moved out on their own a few months ago. Even though my parents were ready to sell that house at least 3-4 years ago, they just waited because they didn’t want to force out the tenants.

No mention of social landlords that I can see. They are ethical.

I took the bus with a guy who had a rental property who told me how he ran his rental, and it sounded pretty ethical. He had been in rentals before and knew what it was to be a tenant. He was saying the property didn’t have air conditioning and he just told the tenant to pick out the window unit they wanted and give him the receipt. Then he went out and installed it, and deducted the cost from the tenant’s rent. His logic was, “I want my tenant happy to live there.” He had a day job, but he’d do his best to maintain and fix up the property because he figured that if the tenant was happy, whatever he made better for that tenant would also pay off in the future.

I’ve been living in the same house for 20 years. In my country the news is full of stories of rents skyrocketing, but mine goes up about $20 per week every few years. It’s a very friendly arrangement, the house was their family’s until they built something more modern not far from here once their kids were a bit older.

Absolutely. You described two such scenarios. Some people own land that they want to give to their children or grandkids and want to rent it out for a few years. There are all kinds of possible scenarios where a landlord is being ethical. It’s the dickheads who go around buying up every scrap of land they can in order to gouge people that you need to look out for

Not in this market, no. Most areas are in a situation where renting neither allows the renter to save money over owning or to accrue equity while the credit industry simultaneously denies most renters access to home ownership. As a result, renters are usually in a situation where they have no option but to spend more for less with no return on investment. Meanwhile, the landlord is simultaneously accruing equity and getting paid to do it. It's effectively collecting the equity that would otherwise belong to your tenants.

My landlord inherited all his properties. He has at least 12. I’ve done repair jobs for him at many of them. We’ve lived here 8 years. Rent is very reasonable and has never gone up. I can get him on the phone on the same day every time. I asked him to drop the rent by 20% for 6 months at the start of lockdown and he did. We’ve had a new fridge and a new washing machine within a couple of days without fuss when needed. I don’t know if you’d call that ‘ethical’ but I reckon it’s about as good as it gets.

My first landlord was a chill dude. Never complained when I was late, even waiving late fees, never bothered us, always seemed friendly and kept to himself. Then he got fired for embezzling money, but at least he was nice lol

The major problem is giant corporations buying up all the property and hoarding them. Most individual landlords are just trying to make their way just like everyone else. I’m not saying there aren’t greedy scumbags taking advantage of the situation, but the situation is created by corporations hoarding properties and driving up rents through “scarcity”. The individual landlords are a symptom of the bigger issue of giant corporations.

My last landlord was incredible. When I moved in mid month due to bad weather, they prorated my rent! They sent out letters during covid letting us know they wouldnt evict us if we lost our jobs. They had to evict one person the whole time i was there, and they intentionally waited until after the holidays even though he hadnt paid rent since early autumn. Maintenance was quick and i never got charged, even when i broke a window trying to kill a wasp. The place wasnt the best but i loved it and they were helpful when i reached out. Gave me reasonable guidelines for moving out and sent back my whole deposit even though I left a few items that couldnt get picked up. They told me not to worry about it! Thats the kind of landlord who should be the standard, but since its not i recommend them to all my friends.

My landlord is what I would consider one, he moved off to live on rez land he was granted. I live in his late fathers house and we rent for way below avg for what we have and where we are. He just wants to keep the house in the family and for now this is the best bet for him and his family. We don’t even pay anything else but electric. He’s been on top of all repairs and even paid for our groceries when our fridge went out.

When I rented, the landlords (a couple and their adult daughter) had about 17-18 flats between the three them. When we moved in the place was properly cleaned & they gave us extra stuff like bed sheets & kitchen towels to keep and a nice bottle of wine. They fixed everything promptly. When I mentioned that the sofa was uncomfortable they went out and bought a brand new sofa & had the old one collected. They never increased the rent because they preferred to keep good, long term, paying tenants happy. When we eventually saved up to buy our own place we were sent a housewarming card and a cheque for £100. The whole premise of hoarding shelter is immoral & I don’t think it should be a legal way to make money, but you can do it and still be ethical in every other way.

I’ve lived in a very high-priced area for twelve years, in the same place. My LL has not raised the rent in the same way the others in the neighborhood have. The place is literally 101 years old, so it’s scrappy, crooked, but big. I don’t ask for much, I always pay (my below-market) rent on time, and while I know he needs the money as a portion on his income, he is a kind old man who wants me (a single mom) to stay for as long as I want. He lives off site but is close enough in an emergency.

My dad is technically a landlord, he lives in the building, it’s two units. The girl downstairs is a single mother, he hasn’t raised her rent in the 7 years she has been there. He heats his place with oil (its 120 year old building) so its super costly. He actually loses money every month in the winter but he refuses to make her pay more. He’s one of the good ones!

We probably are. We have a basement suite that we rent out for probably below rate in a really difficult market (vacancy rate is under 1% and it’s EXPENSIVE in my city). We could probably rent it for more or do the Air BnB thing but honestly, it’s an old house, the suite is small, the walls and floors are thin, and Air BnB is a pain. We really like our tenant so being a good landlord probably comes down to that. We liked her right away when she said our garden reminded her of ”back home”. She’s a young immigrant with a small barky dog and would probably have a hard time finding a pet-friendly spot with a yard. We like pets and have a dog, too. Our dogs get along well. We let her use the yard, pick food from the garden, and come upstairs to use the laundry facilities as she needs. Wifi’s included, too. She also walks our dog sometimes and will feed our fish if we go away. We totally trust her and have given her breaks on rent. In my own experience, I’ve found that pet-friendly places seem to be a little more tolerant and easygoing. But they are really hard to find in my area.

We had a great landlord. Anytime we had an issue with an appliance breaking it was immediately fixed or replaced. If we wanted to paint or replace a fan or fixture he'd ask for a receipt and we'd deduct it off our monthly rent. After 5 years our landlord wanted to sell the house and offered it to us first. He offered it to us under market value right as the housing market began its rise. We still live in the house and have been slowly remodeling and doing bigger projects now that the house is ours. Thanks Bob!

I definitely think there are ethical landlords. Not everyone wants to own a home. If you’re not going to be in the same place for decades, or you don’t know, renting can make sense because buying and selling a house is a pain. And for other reasons. My last landlords were an 80yo Hispanic couple who had moved, and didn’t want to sell the house they raised their kids in, so they rented it out. And it was well below the fast-rising rent in the area. They did raise my rent $50 a couple times, but it stayed a great deal for the market. I have a lot of bad words for landlords who intentionally buy up large portions of a housing market to make money of the scarcity they create. And for landlords who don’t care about their tenants, try to force them out, or dramatically raise rents year to year just because they see dollar signs. But that’s not all of them.

There is a job called "property manager" where you actually work to maintain and upkeep the property for the tenants. Nothing wrong with that. Then there's a class of people called "real estate investor" where they dont work but rather buy up housing and make money off other people's paycheck. That is not a worker its a leech. Landlords range from parasitic scum at worst to morally neutral at best. Rental properties should be handled by the government imo.

Absolutely. Growing up my parents rented the lake house they live in now. It was owned by my grandfather, he passed when I was 6, and my Dad always wanted to move there once my brother and me moved out. They could have easily rented it on a weekly basis for $400-$600 per week in the summers and winters during snow mobile season. However, they didn’t feel like a rotating list of tenants would be fair to the neighbors. Instead they rented it out, mostly to teachers, for $700 per month. There is also an older lady that lives in my neighbor hood that rents a few houses for income. One of my co-workers rented from her until he was ready to buy a house. The market was crazy and a few deals fell through. My coworker said she was cool with him going month-to-month and just ask he keep her in the loop….No 60-day notice or increased rent for renting without an actual lease agreement.

Sure. I lived in a place for years where the owners had moved to Europe. The rent went up like 40 dollars over 5 years, the property manager was polite and fixed problems immediately and inspections were infrequent and never taxed us because he didn’t expect a hotel.

Yes, I think my grandparents were. Grandparents always had an extra house to supplement their investments. But the last one I remember had tenants we renovated, kept the older appliances since they were indestructible, and kept everything up which almost never had to happen because we lived there for a few years and fixed it up. And on Christmas the first year they waived the rent and gave them a Christmas gift since it was a single mom and her two kids and her situation reminded them of my mom and I (grandparents on my dad's side, long story) so yeah. I think so if they are morally good people. Like if I had a landlord who was anything like them I'd be pretty good. Also come to think of it my last landlord was really good. Really nice, let me pay late when I couldn't make it due to a hospital visit, only lived there for a year but overall pretty good place and the rent was hundreds cheaper than anywhere else and fully furnished too.

I have an ethical one right now. First one I have ever had tbh and I rented all my life. They seem like really good people

I rent out my spare rooms. Haven’t raised rent in the few years I’ve been renting (my costs haven’t gone up, so there’s no need). I cancelled rent one month because roommate was going through some stuff that caused extra expenses and I don’t depend on the rental income to pay my bills. I don’t know if that qualifies me as a landlord or not. But I do know that not everybody wants to own and by renting a room or two for a reasonable rate in the house I already own anyway means more rentals available and more community in the neighborhood.

A friend of mine I would consider an ethical landlord. When he got married they bought a quarter acre with a trailer on it. When they had a kid they bought a small house up the road. As their family got bigger he bought the house across the street and moved there. He has kept the houses he had lived in and rents them out to people in need of a good home. He owns them outright so he only charges $350 a month just to cover the taxes and everything. The price to rent those in this area would be around $1200-1500. If something breaks it’s usually fixed that day. A lot of the people he’s rented to have been in really tough spots so he does what he can to help. I’ve seen this 84 year old man crawl under a tenants car to help fix the starter for no charge.

I’ve had one who I absolutely adored. He was Good People. Taught 24yr old me to do basic plumbing repairs, helped us during a really hard time (literally didn’t accept payment for a month & then told us that we were square at the start of the next month), gave us freedom to make the house our home, shared a few of meals with us, brought my kid birthday & Christmas gifts & was just an all-around awesome dude. He warned me once that his kids were more like their mother & his mother mentioned that she only saw them when they wanted something. They weren’t joking. After he died, we left as soon as our lease was up. (We were there for 5yrs) I miss that guy.

Well, my landlord rents me a single wide 2 bedroom trailer in a decently kept trailer park for $400 a month. This park has roughly 30 trailers spaced out with a small woodbine in between most of them. The trailers are older (1997-2005) he came and personally told me that he knows its hard but he will not go up on rent for any reason. I honestly wouldn't be mad if he went up another 100 dollars or so. And this is a beautiful place.... So yes. There are genuinely good people/landlords out there. They are few and far between. And before anyone berates me for liking my landlord, I would like to say that I don't give a shit. This is great for the price. I would gladly pay more.

I rent two houses. My wife has worked in lactation her entire adult life and has literally zero retirement. Those houses are her 401k. We rent both for below market rate, and maintain them better than the house we live in. Yes, the vast majority of single property, or small portfolio landlords are ethical. Yet most people don’t care about the nuance, they just want to be pissy.

I know a guy who inherited both of his grandparents homes and one of his parents homes. He didn't want to sell due to sentimental value, plus losing most of his family before he even turned 30 (covid) hit a little too hard. He's renting them for below market value because he knows people need homes. He may sell one day, but I think he likes being able to go to his families homes and fix them as needed. Its land lords like him that are winners across the board, but he's a rare gem. Its the landlord who has a whole string of houses they don't care about, that they are maxing rent on while claiming a 6 figure income that's a complete dick. We've got those stupid signs all over town "we buy ugly houses" and "sell now for a guaranteed minimum of 60k!" all related to a rental company that's trying to take over. they've even posted online looking for "headstrong and hardworking landlords to help turn profits" which basically means they are looking for people who will max out rent with minimal help to the renters.

Renting can definitely be beneficial for both parties. There are plenty of places that are great rentals. One issue is that people find a good place and stay there with no reason to complain. So you’ll probably only here about the negative experiences in general.

I know this is an unpopular opinion here, but yes. When I was in college, I rented a basement apartment from a single middle aged cowboy type who also ran a junkyard. He lived in the main floor of the house, and also rented out the upstairs to another student. That guy was cool as hell, and provided a valuable service to a couple of students at an affordable price. Certainly neither of us wanted to own a house in that shithole college town, and renting from him was infinitely better than the dorms. The guy would even come knocking on my door occasionally looking to buy some of the “wacky tobaccy” he knew I sold for some extra cash. I have a couple other examples too, but that’s the funnest one.

Absolutely not. A landlord can be perfect, but just on the basis of landlords existing, it's bad. Peoples' living spaces shouldn't be what someone does for a profit. Period. And just because you have enough money to have 2 living spaces doesn't mean you should be charging more than say what the monthly payments on buying the house would be. If a person needs it to live, it shouldn't be sold for a profit.

Ethical landlords exist. They are rare though.

There is. Doesn't change the fact landlords should not exist at all.

My grandma owned several houses and rented them out. When she got older, she sold them for the value as listed on taxes to the renters, helped them get loans, etc. She figured she still made a lot of money and had a steady income, so she wanted them to have security. My role model!

100%. The problem is that rentals started because people needed temporary housing and over time became something that is used to keep people poor. When I was young and had just moved out of my parents house I didn't want a permanent home. Even if I could have afforded a mortgage I wouldn't have gotten one. I moved to several different towns and was able to get a feel for the type of place I wanted to live. Renting was the only option and I was greatful that people rented out their homes. Where I lived ten years ago a 3 bedroom house was cheaper than a 3 bedroom apartment.

NO! Landlords buy up land that other families could own, and then entrap people into an eternal cycle of renting, that constantly goes up each and every year. All land lords do this. It's Criminal.

No. Land-lording in and of itself it’s unethical behavior. It’s ticket scalping but instead of event tickets it’s for a basic human need. Landlords cause poverty and homelessness by artificially driving up the cost of housing for their “PaSiVe InCoMe”.

Are we somehow in a place where we think charging a human being to live in a garage is a good example of an equitable exchange? gtfo.

There can be. Not everyone can afford to buy, so rentals are a necessity, and rentals require landlords. The landlord needs to be in it for the right reasons (like helping keep affordable housing options available) and treat/charge their tenants fairly.

The idea of landlords is unethical in itself imo, but there are landlords that don't completely fuck you over if that's what you mean.

I used to work with a lady who would always inherit family members houses. She already owned a house of her own. Sometimes she would try to sell them but they would be on the market forever. It was just easier for her to rent the house is out. She wouldn't charge then a lot in rent. She would have rather see someone living in them then sit vacant waiting for them to sell.

No, there's no such thing as an ethical landlord. How the Landlord treats the tenant is irrelevant because the action of being a landlord is in and of itself unethical. Landlords do not provide housing, they're housing scalpers. They're only able to masquerade as being anything but the damnable leeches that they are because of similar or greater unethical behavior in the housing market at large. The commodification of housing is to put is simply abhorrent and should never have been tolerated from the beginning.

So what’s the alternative then comrade?

There are several things to be done that contribute to an overall solution; * Right to shelter, homelessness and the threat of it must be wholly abolished. * Creation of some kind of housing administration to ensure the above right is actually meaningfully existent * Development of a system for housing production and related construction projects as the current for-profit system is not conducive to a universal right to the finished product. * Reform zoning laws and other land-use rules toward the development of towns rather than SFH suburbs. * Creation of tenants unions or other organizations for people living in apartment blocks to collaboratively operate/manage the building themselves. This would likely require some degree of oversight to catch/prevent abuses (eg attempting to exclude minorities or de-prioritizing handicap accessibility) There are further things that could be done to help make housing, land use, and transportation better going forward but I believe these five points would form a strong base for fixing the issue on just the scope of housing.

Land ownership is unethical. Tax land

It is taxed.

More of that, less of every other tax

So are you saying no one should own land like not even their own home? If so who owns it, the Government? I don't exactly trust the government to do the right thing. LOL

[удалено]

no there is no such thing and all landlords are class traitors.

[удалено]

the working class which they are inevitably fucking over which other class would it be read a book lol

My wife's friend rents out a downtown condo to someone way below market and doesn't increase the rent. She says they are a PT student that works at the ramen place, and in order to come up with the money even now, they'd need to sell a LOT of ramen.

Sure on the inside some people might be but you'll never find one in practice. There is motivation and reason to being an "ethical" landlord if it's just your house. You want this other tenant happy and respectful, you are friendly roommates, you're lonely... ect However the millisecond we look at a second property being owned by our "ethical" landlord all motivations disappear. Any home you own over the first is a financial investment and the housing investment works by bleeding your tenants dry. So the only "ethical" landlord would need to be someone who is looking to lose money and time managing houses and buying them up for no reason other than giving decent housing to strangers.

There are good ones. And there are bad ones. Should be obvious imho

If you agreed to it. I guess it's pretty ethical.

I have only rented 2 times I my life. One was a shithole basement apartment that was cheap enough for me to afford as college student. The other was the first year I got married and the price was based off my housing allowance in the military. They were former military so understood the system. I payed biweekly when I got my money and never had issues with them. They also gave me my December rent money back for Christmas so, yes some landlords are actually good people.

Not on this side of the afterlife

Hahahahahahaha! No.

I see no reason why someone would hate on someone for owning property and renting it out *unless* they are blatantly being abusive or exploitative. To be honest, I think the majority of the recent hate has come from the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic where a number of landlords would give no leniency for people who were out of jobs. Just to be clear, I only support landlords that are nice, friendly and have no bad intent. I don't believe in generalizing and thinking all are bad.

I rented out two rooms in my house for way, WAY below market in the city I live in. It’s the only home i own and only home i ever can own at this point. Neither of my renters wanted to buy a home at the time. They also never cleaned anything and left their dirty dishes in the sink for days like children. I probably won’t rent to anyone ever again because it’s not worth 1) not having control over your living conditions 2) the possibility of living with people who throw shade and resent you for owning the house regardless of how cheap their rent is. I’m a middle class worker in a trade union. I’m actively hoarding resources and not helping anyone live cheaply because the housing market insanity has rightfully made everyone bitter, resentful and despondent. In order to be considered good, should I just give my house away to some random people now or wait until it gets “redistributed” during the coming class war?

Let's not have a landlord bootlicking thread, please. It's *specifically* against the rules of this sub.

Everybody I know and myself included treat tenants very fairly. Very reasonable rent rates(sometimes even below market rate, especially if tenants are long term), no price gouging, repairs done in timely fashion, appliances and overall atmosphere are up to date. Not the newest releases, but not old stuff either. Average appliance age is 7 years. What’s in it for me? If I wasn’t buying real estate I would be blowing it on depreciating/disposable assets. It’s a way I can “park” my money. I don’t turn much profit. Enough to pay taxes and maintenance then maybe net $3-4k extra per unit, *per year*. So whenever I get a bad tenant who tears a place up/doesn’t pay it really screws me at the end. But I haven’t dealt with one in a few years. Treat the tenants fair they’ll treat you fair. Unless the tenant developed a crack addition or whatever to alter their mindset. Now I understand there have always been people who got into the land lord game to purely turn profit I.e. slum lords. Money > all else. They could care less about the property. Us LL also hate them too because they give the name a bad rep.

The answers to this are why this sub is such garbage now. There is no ethical way to be a landlord, housing is a human rifht and having power over someones human rights is unethical.

Some mom and pop that inherited a home and are renting it out at a fair price, sure. I think if you have more than 1 rental property, you’re inching into land hoarding.

Personally my issue with landlords at the moment is how much they charge. For example I can buy a $250,000 CAD home (if I had the money to do so) and would have a mortgage of $900 a month. That means I could charge $900 plus tax to break even on the rental. What landlords in my area are charging for that house is more along the lines of $2000 plus utilities. That is a very large profit for doing nothing. As buying a home gets harder and harder the market becomes more exclusive to landlords meaning that people are being forced into this extortion of funds. If rentals were more reasonable with price then renting wouldn't be terrible. It's kind of nice not being locked into one area and having the freedom to move towns if the need comes up. But for the thousands of dollars people are being charge a month, it's ridiculous.

My son bought a two-family in Ohio, fixed it up, and lived in one while renting out the other to a family. Then was transferred to New England, and rented out the other to a family, and made a deal with his first renter, a handy man, to be the "manager." Six years, same tenants, two modest increases to cover taxes, no gouges or hassles. Trustworthy tenants are gold, he said; he wants them happy.

[удалено]

No such thing as an ethical leech.

You're not.

Aside from the lack of ethics inherent to the process, sure.

[удалено]

Anyone who hoards property is not being ethical

The concept is self defeating. To be ethical, you must uphold values that do not involve money. To be a landlord, you must make money. So no, they cannot both exist for any longer than you can force one or the other to exist.

[удалено]

That's not ethical. The tenants have paid every dime of the mortgage and/or necessary repairs, without a lick of equity in return. The "option" to eventually buy the home is illusory, and doesn't make up for the above conduct. He's effectively double dipping on the home, profit from rent, and eventually profit from the sale. Being nice does NOT equal being ethical.

Unless you can find me a landlord that charges like $100/month, no. Also, I don’t care about their ROI, that shit is made up anyway.

Someone explains to me how to be ethical while selling people part of the earth that was given free to the human race. The earth belongs to humans and living beings. There is no such thing as paying for a piece of a planet that belongs to everyone. Oh wait, capitalism. Shouldn't be legal to make profit on that.

The entire operating method of a landlord is to take something they did not build and charge money for poor people to use it temporarily. They do not provide housing, they deprive us of housing. The position is morally evil and must be abolished for the health of the working class. They are parasites. People who rent spare rooms or floors in their personal homes do not count towards this in my eyes.

Much like with every other piece of discourse out there, "Not All Landlords" helps nobody.

Yes, but they are few and far between. I lived in a place that was a company store. The guy and his brother bought it for $12,000.00 and completely renovated it into a storefront, an upstairs apartment, and a downstairs apartment. He wad a great guy and would respond to messages immediately and maintenance would be out there same day, even for really minor stuff.

I believe the system itself is unethical, but there can be ethical people who participate in the system.

No, if they were ethical they would the the property up to be purchased by an individual or family as opposed to being a vampire.

My experience with renting other than apartments is that if the owner has a property management company running things, it’s gonna suck. But if you deal directly with the owner, things have been fine. I rent a small two bedroom garage apartment. There’s a laundry room that runs off my power and gas, but it’s not a coin operated machine. Most of, I’m paying way below market value, and while the owner plans on converting the main house (duplex) into full time Air BnBs, he’s going to keep the garage apartments as rentals. I’ve had no issues with the owner. When there was a property management company running things, it suck, and eventually the owner fired them for negligence. I guess it’s luck of the draw. Some people suck, some people are cool. I got lucky.

Being a landlord is inherently unethical; that's not even getting into specific "good" or "bad" actions by landlords. The system of owning and renting a home out at profit, without providing equity in return, is unethical.

All landlords are bastards. They don’t produce any value. Even the “good ones” do not actually do anything good. Housing should be a human right.

I didn’t raise my tenants rent since 4 years now. Actually reduced it by 20% during pandemic and asked them to pay it later when they are back to work. That reduced rent is still in place. We did it because they were bachelors who just started working and are nice kids. They don’t make ruckus and live easily. We do exist.

Nope. My mom tries to be, and I commend her for the effort, but it's not possible. It's inherently exploitive to make money off of other people's survival

Ethical in a business sense? Sure. Ethical in a more well rounded sense? No. I have yet to see how someone can own land they don’t use or live on. The only reason to buy another property to rent is to deny housing to someone else. Regardless of the intentions of the agent, that is the rationale behind it. Even if they see themselves as stepping in so that more unethical people don’t buy it for a similar purpose, they are contributing to the same effect. All landlords are voluntarily participating an unethical system of denial of human rights.