Prime Minister Mark Carney signed a symbolic order signalling his government will prioritize passing his promised middle-class tax cut, following the first in-person meeting of his cabinet on Parliament Hill Wednesday.
A lot of landlords perform zero or only the most minimal maintenance to their properties. I don’t know where this “value added” idea of yours coue come from. Unlike my wage, the rent goes up every year by a fixed percent. They spend as little as possible and over time the neglect builds up. So sad the way things fall apart for want of a little TLC. They will get paid more every year regardless. Then when it’s bad enough maybe apply for an AGI and make the tenants bear the cost of repairs aimed at fancying the place up without fixing any underlying issues, and/or renovict them to raise the rent even further. They are value suckers, not value adders. Both from the tenants, but also by allowing the condition of the building to deteriorate much faster than is required.
No it isn’t, that’s only the case when the market fails like a situation with a finite amount of land in a specific area. There’s nothing inherently exploitative about renting cars to people, or renting a garden tool you only use once a year, or renting a paddle board for a trip to the lake, or renting a hotel room while travelling.
Sorry I meant rental housing because that’s what we are talking about. How does your argument about property taxes apply to a paddle board?
Interesting how your examples emphasize transience and have the feeling of recreational. Housing isn’t something you need once in a while for funsies. You need it every day of your life, ideally without interruption. It’s hard to think of a comparable example to residential rental, because it’s such a key component to life itself. A better example for you would be access to running water or power. Maybe pharmaceuticals to treat chronic disease. You pay a fee to get access to a resource which is beyond your means to obtain as an individual. They shouldn’t be managed according to the whims of random rich people, they are social infrastructure.
go back to having apartment/home rentals just be something landlords do to earn a little bit of money for providing a service
When was that?
Am I understanding you properly that you think housing should be exclusively or primary provided by people who are doing it as a side hustle? Do you think having small artisanal landlords is somehow better than organizations run by professionals? I find it odd that you’ve clearly put a lot of thought into one aspect of the issue about taxes and such, but still sound kind of dismissive about the importance of housing to people, and also the skill involved in properly managing housing, to say nothing of the human beings residing inside. Which is not in high supply among the rinky dink small time landlords I’ve mostly lived under during my life.
But I don’t think big business is the solution; there has to be some sort of accountable body that manages housing. I still don’t see how your various tax schemes do anything to defer the profit motive, which is the driver of rent increases. It has always been that way.
A lot of landlords perform zero or only the most minimal maintenance to their properties. I don’t know where this “value added” idea of yours coue come from. Unlike my wage, the rent goes up every year by a fixed percent. They spend as little as possible and over time the neglect builds up. So sad the way things fall apart for want of a little TLC. They will get paid more every year regardless. Then when it’s bad enough maybe apply for an AGI and make the tenants bear the cost of repairs aimed at fancying the place up without fixing any underlying issues, and/or renovict them to raise the rent even further. They are value suckers, not value adders. Both from the tenants, but also by allowing the condition of the building to deteriorate much faster than is required.
Sorry I meant rental housing because that’s what we are talking about. How does your argument about property taxes apply to a paddle board?
Interesting how your examples emphasize transience and have the feeling of recreational. Housing isn’t something you need once in a while for funsies. You need it every day of your life, ideally without interruption. It’s hard to think of a comparable example to residential rental, because it’s such a key component to life itself. A better example for you would be access to running water or power. Maybe pharmaceuticals to treat chronic disease. You pay a fee to get access to a resource which is beyond your means to obtain as an individual. They shouldn’t be managed according to the whims of random rich people, they are social infrastructure.
When was that?
Am I understanding you properly that you think housing should be exclusively or primary provided by people who are doing it as a side hustle? Do you think having small artisanal landlords is somehow better than organizations run by professionals? I find it odd that you’ve clearly put a lot of thought into one aspect of the issue about taxes and such, but still sound kind of dismissive about the importance of housing to people, and also the skill involved in properly managing housing, to say nothing of the human beings residing inside. Which is not in high supply among the rinky dink small time landlords I’ve mostly lived under during my life.
But I don’t think big business is the solution; there has to be some sort of accountable body that manages housing. I still don’t see how your various tax schemes do anything to defer the profit motive, which is the driver of rent increases. It has always been that way.