• CodeInvasion@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    For us, it’s because work required that we temporarily relocate. But we plan to move back in a couple years and we really like our house.

    For others it usually has to do with the fact that selling a home costs 10% of the home’s value after all fees are accounted for.

    Then there is the other set of people who genuinely think the equity in a property is more lucrative than money in the stock market (depending on the market and timing, it could be, but it’s ultimately a bet).

    But I could ask the same question of every single person bemoaning the existence of landlords. If it’s oh so easy to be a landlord, why don’t they just become a landlord?

    • Saurok@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Probably because they don’t have the capital necessary to become a landlord in the first place. If you have enough money, being a landlord requires literally no work at all.

      • CodeInvasion@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        I guess getting that initial capital required no work at all either.

        Why don’t they just get that initial capital if it’s so easy.

        Unless someone was born with money, the argument against non-corporate landlords (97.5% of single family homes are owned by non-institutional investors) is nonsensical, because those owners had to work for the initial capital.