I think people should take some responsibility and choose to be born earlier next time. If somebody buys a house before you do, we'll... That's on you.
this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2026
778 points (97.7% liked)
memes
22014 readers
3590 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
This is mistaken. They don't ask why tenets hate them. They don't care. Tenents are just part of business, so they aren't people in that case.
That said, I do know some human landlords, they do exist. They aren't bad people. And they do care about the quality of repairs and such.
It always kind of blows my mind when landlords do dodgy repairs. You're halfassing your own property. Short sighted pennynpinching that'll bite you in the ass down the road.
In a lot of cases, the landlord pays for a management service. That services job is to keep rent flowing and expenses down.
That said, cheap repairs make financial sense. Most will be good enough to not cost a ton later, and the few that aren't... well, they usually take a while before they end up costing a lot. So the money is in the hands of the landlord longer, and they can invest it in more properties... so they get all the savings from the cheaper repairs, plus the investment income of that savings. From that they can pay for the things that go horribly wrong. Most of the time it will work out in their advantage.
And of course they can always sell the house before the expensive repairs to someone who will do those repairs themselves and flip the house.
That is the problem with money based decisions.
Yeah, it never saves you money in the long run. Never cheap out on repairs.
Leaks that saturate the floor boards cost me nothing. No idea what kind of damage that did down the line because I don't live there anymore.
At least the landlord saved £1k with some dodgy plumbers though.
It's a terrible incentive structure. Tenants have no motivation to repair the place they aren't going to live in a year from now and landlords only have to put a bandaid on any problem until a tenant falls for it.
Either a tenant plans to be at a place long enough to invest their time/money or the landlord has to be selfless and repair the house cause it's the right thing to do.
There was a local law coming up that essentially said that landlords would be required to fix properties within a 3 month period (I think) or the county would seize the property and auction it to the public, then whoever buys it would have the same amount of time or same thing. I could see it being abused somehow but it sounded good on paper.
Landlords/homeowners are always required to "repair" a property to a bare minimum livability (as determined by law) but it's usually about repairing the problem using the least money possible.
It's why landlords turn themselves into DIY handymen. In theory it's the cheapest option but there's a reason we hire professionals to do plumbing.
I could see it being abused somehow
Richer fuckers will buy them cheap at auction, spend pennies "renovating"...
Capitalism in a nutshell.
As a homeowner who's mortgage goes up every year thanks to insurance and taxes. I've started to understand why rent always goes up.
My "favorite" is when you get a rent increase despite overall dropping rents. The landlord would rather risk vacancy AND lower rent from the next tenant for the pure joy of inconveniencing you with a move.
I lived at a place many years ago, and the landlord wanted to increase the rent from 900 to 1300. Which was just a fantasy number for the area. I countered with 1000, because moving is a hassle and it was an ok place. They said no, so we moved.
Then the place was vacant for years afterwards. I always chuckled when I walked past it. Great job, instead of getting a steady income, you try to gouge your tenant and get nothing! Art of the deal level right there.
Perhaps they gave you the f-off, we don't want anyone living in our house anymore number... Either way thats a horrible thing to put someone through.
It works.
Whilst for some it might just be the inertia of "I increase the rent every year", for many it will be a careful calculation, assuming that staying in the same place has an increasing value to you over time. It also helps with the overall dropping rents "problem" by helping to increase the average, and encourage other landlords to do the same.
I'm not convinced that landlords' collusion to fix the cost of rent is the "careful calculation" that you're describing. From my perspective, it's quite the easy choice for them to extract more money instead of less money.
I only potentially benefit from an overall market reduction in rent (which rarely occurs) if I move to a new apartment because they refuse to negotiate a lease renewal at a lower rate.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Where do you live that any of that is legal? The USA?
As a USian, my experience with the rental market was "move every 12-18 months to get the Teaser Rate for your unit, receive a notice from your landlord that the price of the unit is going up hundreds (if not thousands) of dollars, pick up and move to a new unit". I once moved across the hall because the unit next door from me was being advertised at $200 less than the place I was staying. I only started looking because my smaller unit was getting a $300 rental increase. So, net $500, because landlords are insane. US Rental markets are an absolute clown parade.
It's funny seeing all this landlord hate as someone who lives in a country where it's rare with shitty landlords. We don't really have "landlords" like you do, it's mostly a few big real estate companies who own the vast majority of apartments and are actually good as they compete. I've lived in this apartment for 10 years and my rent has increased by 8% but now water and electricity is included, and they have completely renovated the house with lots of nice new things and tech, never denied requests for repairs and have very good communication with us. They're added solar cells to the roof, a big information screen in the entry with real time arrivals for trams and busses at nearby stops, chilled delivery boxes so when we order grocery bags we don't need to be home when they're delivered, we have 5 laundry rooms; one on each of the 4 floors and a bigger one on the ground floor, all with 2 big washing machines, dryers, drying cabinets and drying rooms and they've added filter that filter out microplastics etc., they've added a big bike storage room with tools, pumps and lockers with chargers for e-bikes, mailboxes that send a text when we get mail, a common room with a kitchen, sofas, tv that anyone can book (for free) and the "landlord" hosts a fika there every week with pastries where we can give feedback and make requests, and sometimes other events there too, and there are three elevators (to small, one big) and a trash room with recycling in the building. My apartment is one bedroom with full size kitchen, 31m², and ~$540 a month. I've gotten new appliances, renovated bathroom and other things since I moved in. And they used some of the material from the renovation to make artworks on two of the building faces, a big hanging lamp in the middle of the spiral staircase and furniture for the lobby and yard. There's also so many nice plants both along the outer walls and in the yard, some with edible fruits and/or flowers.
That is super cool. looks like you're in a really good spot.
As much as I hate scumlord landlords, to play devils avocado there are certain factors that can cause constant rent rises. namely insurance increases, property taxes, and loan interest rises that may have to be factored in. Continuing to increase rent purly because thats what the market says it should be is a full dick move... But also some blame needs to lie at the feet of the government for carving out tax breaks to encourage rampant speculation on housing prices. Homes should never be investments.. there are plenty of other avenues to make money. If the price goes up, it should be a slow gradual increase, not because you can negatively gear etc.
I agree with everything except the loan interest increases.
Maybe they shouldn't have a mortgage on a property they are renting if that's going to cause them issues. Just sell it
Continuing to increase rent purly because thats what the market says it should be is a full dick move…
High home prices are what incentivize people to build more homes.
Homes should never be investments...
Why not? A huge chunk of the population wants to rent. Maybe they are going to college, or are moving to a new city and want to get a feel before buying, or maybe they just don't want to deal with the headache when something needs to be fixed. And if people want to rent, then there need to be rentable spaces. And why would anyone want to make and maintain a rentable space if they didn't expect to make money off of it?
The issue isnt that homes are viewed as investments, but that land is. If you build an apartment building and maintain it and provide good living conditions for your renters, then you should be able to make a profit, since you are doing valuable work. But if you buy a piece of land and then hold it for 20 years while everyone else builds homes and businesses around it, and then sell so someone can build an apartment on it, then you do not deserve to make a protfit because you didnt do anything. The value you gain from selling the land exists purely because everyone around you made the area a better place to live.
And that is why rents keep going up. In a functional market, sure, whatever, jack the rent up sky high - you will get hosed when all your renters move out, and you still have to pay for maintenance and upkeep and taxes. But in the current market, construction of new housing is constrained by government regulations and high land prices - and the land is expensive because everyone is only willing to sell for an exorbitant speculative price.
So long as they're paid I don't think they care. If everyone came together to refuse paying rent then that would get the message across.
My region has legal language called the Landlord and Tenant Act, which prohibits the landlord from raising the rent by more than 2% per year. When one vacates, the new tenant of course will have their rent start at 'market rate', but at least while living there one's rent is protected. As well, if reno-victed, the tenant must be given similar space for similar rent once renos are complete.
This falls down a bit, as transgressors get to go against an adjudication panel, and that sometimes goes all-in for the landlords. But mostly it keeps the dickishness down.
I am very lucky to have gotten a cheap apartment by town, and it gets cheaper by comparison way faster than it gets rent increases. The market average is about £400 higher now
stuff like this makes me so happy i live in a housing co-op. we had to raise rent by 5% a year due to rising energy costs, but that allowed us to put 50kW more solar on the roof and start drilling for a geothermal heat pump.
Refusing repairs is a dick move, but raising rent can be a consequence of rapidly rising property taxes and increasing insurance premiums. Would be nice if renters got an actual itemized invoice showing what goes into the rent cost.
Itemized invoice would be killer! There’d have to be an item called “pure profit”, shining some light on their greed.
Most landlords pretend that the money that goes towards paying off the mortgage is a profit. Lots of the ones I see are always like “I make no money off of this” while the tenant pays off their loan for the house for them. Idiots.
I made nothing! I only got an entire house and didnt do any real work for it!
They live paycheck to paycheck. It’s just your paycheck
You'd need proper accounts the P+L and importantly the balance sheet for full transparency At least until they start paying their accountants more for corporate fuckery - though I think many do already to dodge taxes.
But the real fucker is in the bank loan, you probably can't borrow at the same rate until you have as much collateral as them. Even though your rent is literally the asset, and you and the previous tenants keep buying them more collateral that puts them in a better position to borrow more and acquire more.
Good old Free market, no barriers to entry, no first mover advantage, no congestion effects . . . /s. I'm sure rent control is terrible invention, ruins cities.
UK solved this like a century ago with council houses. But then Thatcher sold them off.
Houses and flats owned by the local government and affordable to rent. But now supply is so limited that they only go to the most vulnerable and most people can't get one.
A lot of the ones sold off are now owned by private landlords.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Property taxes and insurance premiums on what is mostly passive income. No invoice needed. For most of us, rent is the majority of our paychecks, which are earned by working.
So you're saying that landlords are keeping prices down out of the goodness of their hearts, and it's external costs causing the increase?
That's very anti capitalism. You're supposed to charge as high as you can at all times, regardless of costs.
"The son of the worker, on entering life, finds no field which he may till, no machine which he may tend, no mine in which he may dig, without accepting to leave a great part of what he will produce to a master. He must sell his labour for a scant and uncertain wage. His father and his grandfather have toiled to drain this field, to build this mill, to perfect this machine. They gave to the work the full measure of their strength, and what more could they give? But their heir comes into the world poorer than the lowest savage. If he obtains leave to till the fields, it is on condition of surrendering a quarter of the produce to his master, and another quarter to the government and the middlemen. And this tax, levied upon him by the State, the capitalist, the lord of the manor, and the middleman, is always increasing; it rarely leaves him the power to improve his system of culture. If he turns to industry, he is allowed to work--though not always even that --only on condition that he yield a half or two-thirds of the product to him whom the land recognizes as the owner of the machine.
We cry shame on the feudal baron who forbade the peasant to turn a clod of earth unless he surrendered to his lord a fourth of his crop. We call those the barbarous times. But if the forms have changed, the relations have remained the same, and the worker is forced, under the name of free contract, to accept feudal obligations. For, turn where he will, he can find no better conditions. Everything has become private property, and he must accept, or die of hunger." - Peter Kropotkin (The conquest of bread)
It's the price fixing. If the market was the way it used to be, you could afford rent.
Its almost time everyone! :-)
view more: next ›