Skip Navigation

When leftists say "landlord are parasites" or similar dislike of landlords, do they also mean the people that own like a couple of houses as an investment, or only the big landlords?

Reason I'm asking is because I have an aunt that owns like maybe 3 - 5 (not sure the exact amount) small townhouses around the city (well, when I say "city" think of like the areas around a city where theres no tall buildings, but only small 2-3 stories single family homes in the neighborhood) and have these houses up for rent, and honestly, my aunt and her husband doesn't seem like a terrible people. They still work a normal job, and have to pay taxes like everyone else have to. They still have their own debts to pay. I'm not sure exactly how, but my parents say they did a combination of saving up money and taking loans from banks to be able to buy these properties, fix them, then put them up for rent. They don't overcharge, and usually charge slightly below the market to retain tenants, and fix things (or hire people to fix things) when their tenants request them.

I mean, they are just trying to survive in this capitalistic world. They wanna save up for retirement, and fund their kids to college, and leave something for their kids, so they have less of stress in life. I don't see them as bad people. I mean, its not like they own multiple apartment buildings, or doing excessive wealth hoarding.

Do leftists mean people like my aunt too? Or are they an exception to the "landlords are bad" sentinment?

513

You're viewing a single thread.

513 comments
  • I have no problem with landlords.

    Those who own apartments are also taking some big risks I’m not comfortable with. When something requires maintenance, it’s usually something very expensive.

    This means that either the landlord has to have like 50 k€ ready for emergencies or be willing to borrow money from a bank and pay back with interest.

    • An alternative to a landlord is for the apartment complex to be collectively owned by the tenets, making it a housing coop. That would mean any big expenses would be dustributed amongst everyone, making it more nsnageable. Collectively owned buoldings tend to recieve more maintainence, as the tenents have an incentive to maintain the value of their property.

      • A similar setup can also be seen in the ownership of apartments buildings. You can have a limited liability company that manages major renovations and other expenses that concern the building as a whole. The idea is that you own shares in that company, which gives you the right to live in a specific apartment. In practice, you can still treat the inside as if you owned everything, although technically everything is still owned cooperatively.

You've viewed 513 comments.