Yes, I'm a Conservative, But SOME Rent Control IS Necesary

[JWBooth]

You sound like a whinger who wants other people to subsidize his lifestyle. You also need some remedial instruction in the difference between Renting and Owning.

You are a renter. Your landlord is the property owner. The fact that he rents to you does not mean he cedes his property rights to you.

If govt is administered properly, than YES, it would mean that the LL DOES cede some property rights. The "rights" to not ROB US of hundreds of $$ per month.

Maybe you LIKE robbery. Are you typing from a prison cell ?

^^^ Totalitarian statist trying to justify government taking of private property ^^^

Yep

 

[WinterBorn]

Yes, the gov’t should protect consumers from fraud or dangerous profits.

But the govt should not get involved simply to make some things cheaper. If they are too expensive, the consumer should find cheaper products.

So you would oppose a rent control of ANY amount of rent increase ? How about an increase of $3000/month on a $600/month apartment ? (600% increase)

Is there a line you would draw ? If so, at what point ?

If the apartments are outrageously priced, people will not rent them. Are the other apartments in the area in the $600 a month range?

 

[JWBooth]

Yes, the gov’t should protect consumers from fraud or dangerous profits.

But the govt should not get involved simply to make some things cheaper. If they are too expensive, the consumer should find cheaper products.

So you would oppose a rent control of ANY amount of rent increase ? How about an increase of $3000/month on a $600/month apartment ? (600% increase)

Is there a line you would draw ? If so, at what point ?

If the market will bear a 600% increase, then it may just be that the landlord is trying to upgrade the quality of his tenants.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes, the gov’t should protect consumers from fraud or dangerous profits.

But the govt should not get involved simply to make some things cheaper. If they are too expensive, the consumer should find cheaper products.

So you would oppose a rent control of ANY amount of rent increase ? How about an increase of $3000/month on a $600/month apartment ? (600% increase)

Is there a line you would draw ? If so, at what point ?

If the apartments are outrageously priced, people will not rent them. Are the other apartments in the area in the $600 a month range?

Then the question arises, what if the new landlord does get $950 a month for those apartments? That would mean the new landlord knew what he was doing. It would mean he was able to maximize the profits on his investment. It could mean that the new and former landlord knew this rental price was possible, so the former landlord sold the complex at the highest profit he could make, and the new landlord has to charge that amount of rent to repay the loan he took to buy the place plus make a profit.

Should government be there to intrude in such a business transaction?

$600.00 a month range is about what I charge up here. But by any stretch of the imagination, this is not Florida. Rents in better areas here go for up to $850.00 a month or better.

What Protectionist told us thus far is that he was paying more than a reasonable price for rent. Hell, that's even reasonable for the Cleveland area. So it doesn't surprise me that rentals down there are going for, or expected to go for a lot more money.

More and more people are flocking to the south than ever before, especially as more boomers like myself retire. That means his apartment will be in demand regardless what he thinks about the new price.

 

[WinterBorn]

Yes, the gov’t should protect consumers from fraud or dangerous profits.

But the govt should not get involved simply to make some things cheaper. If they are too expensive, the consumer should find cheaper products.

So you would oppose a rent control of ANY amount of rent increase ? How about an increase of $3000/month on a $600/month apartment ? (600% increase)

Is there a line you would draw ? If so, at what point ?

If the apartments are outrageously priced, people will not rent them. Are the other apartments in the area in the $600 a month range?

Then the question arises, what if the new landlord does get $950 a month for those apartments? That would mean the new landlord knew what he was doing. It would mean he was able to maximize the profits on his investment. It could mean that the new and former landlord knew this rental price was possible, so the former landlord sold the complex at the highest profit he could make, and the new landlord has to charge that amount of rent to repay the loan he took to buy the place plus make a profit.

Should government be there to intrude in such a business transaction?

$600.00 a month range is about what I charge up here. But by any stretch of the imagination, this is not Florida. Rents in better areas here go for up to $850.00 a month or better.

What Protectionist told us thus far is that he was paying more than a reasonable price for rent. Hell, that's even reasonable for the Cleveland area. So it doesn't surprise me that rentals down there are going for, or expected to go for a lot more money.

More and more people are flocking to the south than ever before, especially as more boomers like myself retire. That means his apartment will be in demand regardless what he thinks about the new price.

According to Protectionist, the landlord raised the rent by $3,000. So what was renting for $600 now goes for $3,600. If that is true, it sounds like the owner wants the place empty so he can do something else with the property.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes, the gov’t should protect consumers from fraud or dangerous profits.

But the govt should not get involved simply to make some things cheaper. If they are too expensive, the consumer should find cheaper products.

So you would oppose a rent control of ANY amount of rent increase ? How about an increase of $3000/month on a $600/month apartment ? (600% increase)

Is there a line you would draw ? If so, at what point ?

If the apartments are outrageously priced, people will not rent them. Are the other apartments in the area in the $600 a month range?

Then the question arises, what if the new landlord does get $950 a month for those apartments? That would mean the new landlord knew what he was doing. It would mean he was able to maximize the profits on his investment. It could mean that the new and former landlord knew this rental price was possible, so the former landlord sold the complex at the highest profit he could make, and the new landlord has to charge that amount of rent to repay the loan he took to buy the place plus make a profit.

Should government be there to intrude in such a business transaction?

$600.00 a month range is about what I charge up here. But by any stretch of the imagination, this is not Florida. Rents in better areas here go for up to $850.00 a month or better.

What Protectionist told us thus far is that he was paying more than a reasonable price for rent. Hell, that's even reasonable for the Cleveland area. So it doesn't surprise me that rentals down there are going for, or expected to go for a lot more money.

More and more people are flocking to the south than ever before, especially as more boomers like myself retire. That means his apartment will be in demand regardless what he thinks about the new price.

According to Protectionist, the landlord raised the rent by $3,000. So what was renting for $600 now goes for $3,600. If that is true, it sounds like the owner wants the place empty so he can do something else with the property.

I think you're mistaken. I believe what he said was it went from $600.00 to $930.00 or something like that. Still, a huge increase, especially for somebody on a fixed income. That's an over 50% increase in one year.

Maybe when I get out of the shower I'll go back to find a post where he mentioned the price, but I do recall one post where somebody posed the question about $3,000 a month, but it was just for the sake of making a point. I believe.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You sound like Gracie and what she was talking about in California

Go to south Carolina or Wyoming.

"Going" costs money, and it's not easy to do when you have a cat. I have been thinking about going to Johnson City, TN, but getting there is the problem.

Walking is cheap!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

They have a huge old Kodiak film factory,

I thought Kodiak was smokeless tobacco.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Yes, the gov’t should protect consumers from fraud or dangerous profits.

But the govt should not get involved simply to make some things cheaper. If they are too expensive, the consumer should find cheaper products.

So you would oppose a rent control of ANY amount of rent increase ? How about an increase of $3000/month on a $600/month apartment ? (600% increase)

Is there a line you would draw ? If so, at what point ?

If the apartments are outrageously priced, people will not rent them. Are the other apartments in the area in the $600 a month range?

Then the question arises, what if the new landlord does get $950 a month for those apartments? That would mean the new landlord knew what he was doing. It would mean he was able to maximize the profits on his investment. It could mean that the new and former landlord knew this rental price was possible, so the former landlord sold the complex at the highest profit he could make, and the new landlord has to charge that amount of rent to repay the loan he took to buy the place plus make a profit.

Should government be there to intrude in such a business transaction?

$600.00 a month range is about what I charge up here. But by any stretch of the imagination, this is not Florida. Rents in better areas here go for up to $850.00 a month or better.

What Protectionist told us thus far is that he was paying more than a reasonable price for rent. Hell, that's even reasonable for the Cleveland area. So it doesn't surprise me that rentals down there are going for, or expected to go for a lot more money.

More and more people are flocking to the south than ever before, especially as more boomers like myself retire. That means his apartment will be in demand regardless what he thinks about the new price.

According to Protectionist, the landlord raised the rent by $3,000. So what was renting for $600 now goes for $3,600. If that is true, it sounds like the owner wants the place empty so he can do something else with the property.

There are those UA reading skills! He said it went up by 60% to almost $1000 a month.

 

[JoeMoma]

They have a huge old Kodiak film factory,

I thought Kodiak was smokeless tobacco.

Auto correct I bet!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_re...03,-81.907197,29.358837,-82.845154_rect/9_zm/

You of course would have to do a crime search to make sure that area is safe.........But that is near a VA Hospital in Gainsville, Florida

He said he didn't want to be near Gators, and the University of Florida is filled with them!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I live in an apartment complex, that recently was bought by a new landlord. That landlord has been increasing expired lease rents by as much as 60%. Imagine that your rent is $600/month and suddenly it's damn near $1,000/month.

Whoa! For low income seniors on Social Security and small pensions, this aint gonna fly. Actually, younger people still in the workforce with higher incomes, aren't taking to well to it either. Practically everybody in this complex is moving out. Some people are moving in and paying the higher rents, but not as many as are moving out. I've never seen so many moving vans in my life.

Next May, I will be moving out too, and still haven't figured out where to move to. I have limitations because of a low credit score and income, but I'll find someplace, even if it's not as good as where I am now.

All this is because Florida has no limit of what landlords can raise rents to. The only thing limiting them is new residents' capability to pay, and what they are able to rent apartments for.

But there is another side to this, This isn't oil or minerals mined from the ground. It's not furniture being made and sold. This is about PEOPLE. And it's about people who have been living in this complex for years, and these apartments are their HOMES. One woman who just moved out, had been living here for 25 years. Longtime neighbor-friendships are being obliterated.

If landlords NEED to raise rents, (say 10% or less) for some reason, that's understandable, but to raise them by HUNDREDS of dollars, just for GREED, is not what we ought to be OK with in this country. When hundreds of people are forced out of their homes, this is unacceptable. As is the case with most conservatives, I also favor deregulation of business, but this is one case that is screaming for MORE regulation, to a reasonable degree.

Saying we need rent control is like saying you need to put a gun in your mouth and pull the trigger. If you don't want your rent to go up, then buy a place. In places where they do have rent control people sign a lease and then live in that place for 30 - 40 years. The owners go bankrupt because after 30 years the rent no longer covers the upkeep on the property.

Where do they have rent control. Also no ones signs a least for that long, 1 year is the normal lease time.

This is another topic you know nothing about. Why not shut up now and save yourself the embarrassment?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

what do you expect when a brain surgeon who turned down the position to be sec of HHS because it was 'too complicated' (ironically though he ran for potus) then accepts the position of sec of HUD? what qualifications did he possess to be considered for such a position? cause he had the right 'look'?

trump has installed the most incompetent individuals to head every dept in order to destroy them. betsy devos for ed sec? scott pruitt & now his replacement for sec of EPA?

what did you expect was gonna happen?

And the new Medicaid Secretary sought to end Medicaid in her state of Maine.

Who in the hell is the Medicaid Secretary?

Please stop the stupid! It hurts!

 

[WinterBorn]

Yes, the gov’t should protect consumers from fraud or dangerous profits.

But the govt should not get involved simply to make some things cheaper. If they are too expensive, the consumer should find cheaper products.

So you would oppose a rent control of ANY amount of rent increase ? How about an increase of $3000/month on a $600/month apartment ? (600% increase)

Is there a line you would draw ? If so, at what point ?

If the apartments are outrageously priced, people will not rent them. Are the other apartments in the area in the $600 a month range?

Then the question arises, what if the new landlord does get $950 a month for those apartments? That would mean the new landlord knew what he was doing. It would mean he was able to maximize the profits on his investment. It could mean that the new and former landlord knew this rental price was possible, so the former landlord sold the complex at the highest profit he could make, and the new landlord has to charge that amount of rent to repay the loan he took to buy the place plus make a profit.

Should government be there to intrude in such a business transaction?

$600.00 a month range is about what I charge up here. But by any stretch of the imagination, this is not Florida. Rents in better areas here go for up to $850.00 a month or better.

What Protectionist told us thus far is that he was paying more than a reasonable price for rent. Hell, that's even reasonable for the Cleveland area. So it doesn't surprise me that rentals down there are going for, or expected to go for a lot more money.

More and more people are flocking to the south than ever before, especially as more boomers like myself retire. That means his apartment will be in demand regardless what he thinks about the new price.

According to Protectionist, the landlord raised the rent by $3,000. So what was renting for $600 now goes for $3,600. If that is true, it sounds like the owner wants the place empty so he can do something else with the property.

I think you're mistaken. I believe what he said was it went from $600.00 to $930.00 or something like that. Still, a huge increase, especially for somebody on a fixed income. That's an over 50% increase in one year.

Maybe when I get out of the shower I'll go back to find a post where he mentioned the price, but I do recall one post where somebody posed the question about $3,000 a month, but it was just for the sake of making a point. I believe.

Yes, the gov’t should protect consumers from fraud or dangerous profits.

But the govt should not get involved simply to make some things cheaper. If they are too expensive, the consumer should find cheaper products.

So you would oppose a rent control of ANY amount of rent increase ? How about an increase of $3000/month on a $600/month apartment ? (600% increase)

Is there a line you would draw ? If so, at what point ?

The bold is mine.

He said there was an increase of $3000/month and then specified a 600% increase. A 600% increase on $600 equals $3,600.

 

[Preacher]

I live in an apartment complex, that recently was bought by a new landlord. That landlord has been increasing expired lease rents by as much as 60%. Imagine that your rent is $600/month and suddenly it's damn near $1,000/month.

Whoa! For low income seniors on Social Security and small pensions, this aint gonna fly. Actually, younger people still in the workforce with higher incomes, aren't taking to well to it either. Practically everybody in this complex is moving out. Some people are moving in and paying the higher rents, but not as many as are moving out. I've never seen so many moving vans in my life.

Next May, I will be moving out too, and still haven't figured out where to move to. I have limitations because of a low credit score and income, but I'll find someplace, even if it's not as good as where I am now.

All this is because Florida has no limit of what landlords can raise rents to. The only thing limiting them is new residents' capability to pay, and what they are able to rent apartments for.

But there is another side to this, This isn't oil or minerals mined from the ground. It's not furniture being made and sold. This is about PEOPLE. And it's about people who have been living in this complex for years, and these apartments are their HOMES. One woman who just moved out, had been living here for 25 years. Longtime neighbor-friendships are being obliterated.

If landlords NEED to raise rents, (say 10% or less) for some reason, that's understandable, but to raise them by HUNDREDS of dollars, just for GREED, is not what we ought to be OK with in this country. When hundreds of people are forced out of their homes, this is unacceptable. As is the case with most conservatives, I also favor deregulation of business, but this is one case that is screaming for MORE regulation, to a reasonable degree.

Here its not landlords buying and raising prices its all the damn yuppy trash from Atlanta buying or renting 2nd homes up here and its raising the prices. We pay 1,000 for a 3/2 home. I know a woman who works at Wal Mart and just bought her first home with her husband and with their taxes and insurance included pays 750$ a month!

 

[Preacher]

You sound like Gracie and what she was talking about in California

Go to south Carolina or Wyoming.

"Going" costs money, and it's not easy to do when you have a cat. I have been thinking about going to Johnson City, TN, but getting there is the problem.

I lived there for a bit... It's kind of seedy ..


But they have industry ..I worked next to the river at a plastic factory..they have cheap places to live .

.

The Tri Cities are nice. Lived there for a few months back in 2016. Wish I had stayed.

 

[WinterBorn]

https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_re...03,-81.907197,29.358837,-82.845154_rect/9_zm/

You of course would have to do a crime search to make sure that area is safe.........But that is near a VA Hospital in Gainsville, Florida

He said he didn't want to be near Gators, and the University of Florida is filled with them!

Hey Admiral! How did you like that game yesterday?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So you would oppose a rent control of ANY amount of rent increase ? How about an increase of $3000/month on a $600/month apartment ? (600% increase)

Is there a line you would draw ? If so, at what point ?

If the apartments are outrageously priced, people will not rent them. Are the other apartments in the area in the $600 a month range?

Then the question arises, what if the new landlord does get $950 a month for those apartments? That would mean the new landlord knew what he was doing. It would mean he was able to maximize the profits on his investment. It could mean that the new and former landlord knew this rental price was possible, so the former landlord sold the complex at the highest profit he could make, and the new landlord has to charge that amount of rent to repay the loan he took to buy the place plus make a profit.

Should government be there to intrude in such a business transaction?

$600.00 a month range is about what I charge up here. But by any stretch of the imagination, this is not Florida. Rents in better areas here go for up to $850.00 a month or better.

What Protectionist told us thus far is that he was paying more than a reasonable price for rent. Hell, that's even reasonable for the Cleveland area. So it doesn't surprise me that rentals down there are going for, or expected to go for a lot more money.

More and more people are flocking to the south than ever before, especially as more boomers like myself retire. That means his apartment will be in demand regardless what he thinks about the new price.

According to Protectionist, the landlord raised the rent by $3,000. So what was renting for $600 now goes for $3,600. If that is true, it sounds like the owner wants the place empty so he can do something else with the property.

I think you're mistaken. I believe what he said was it went from $600.00 to $930.00 or something like that. Still, a huge increase, especially for somebody on a fixed income. That's an over 50% increase in one year.

Maybe when I get out of the shower I'll go back to find a post where he mentioned the price, but I do recall one post where somebody posed the question about $3,000 a month, but it was just for the sake of making a point. I believe.

Yes, the gov’t should protect consumers from fraud or dangerous profits.

But the govt should not get involved simply to make some things cheaper. If they are too expensive, the consumer should find cheaper products.

So you would oppose a rent control of ANY amount of rent increase ? How about an increase of $3000/month on a $600/month apartment ? (600% increase)

Is there a line you would draw ? If so, at what point ?

The bold is mine.

He said there was an increase of $3000/month and then specified a 600% increase. A 600% increase on $600 equals $3,600.

No, he didn't say that. What he asked was "what if" as to make a point. He was questioning if there should be a limit and if so, how much. Kind of like what we do in the Minimum Wage discussions where somebody asks why not make MW $50.00 an hour?

 

[WinterBorn]

If the apartments are outrageously priced, people will not rent them. Are the other apartments in the area in the $600 a month range?

Then the question arises, what if the new landlord does get $950 a month for those apartments? That would mean the new landlord knew what he was doing. It would mean he was able to maximize the profits on his investment. It could mean that the new and former landlord knew this rental price was possible, so the former landlord sold the complex at the highest profit he could make, and the new landlord has to charge that amount of rent to repay the loan he took to buy the place plus make a profit.

Should government be there to intrude in such a business transaction?

$600.00 a month range is about what I charge up here. But by any stretch of the imagination, this is not Florida. Rents in better areas here go for up to $850.00 a month or better.

What Protectionist told us thus far is that he was paying more than a reasonable price for rent. Hell, that's even reasonable for the Cleveland area. So it doesn't surprise me that rentals down there are going for, or expected to go for a lot more money.

More and more people are flocking to the south than ever before, especially as more boomers like myself retire. That means his apartment will be in demand regardless what he thinks about the new price.

According to Protectionist, the landlord raised the rent by $3,000. So what was renting for $600 now goes for $3,600. If that is true, it sounds like the owner wants the place empty so he can do something else with the property.

I think you're mistaken. I believe what he said was it went from $600.00 to $930.00 or something like that. Still, a huge increase, especially for somebody on a fixed income. That's an over 50% increase in one year.

Maybe when I get out of the shower I'll go back to find a post where he mentioned the price, but I do recall one post where somebody posed the question about $3,000 a month, but it was just for the sake of making a point. I believe.

Yes, the gov’t should protect consumers from fraud or dangerous profits.

But the govt should not get involved simply to make some things cheaper. If they are too expensive, the consumer should find cheaper products.

So you would oppose a rent control of ANY amount of rent increase ? How about an increase of $3000/month on a $600/month apartment ? (600% increase)

Is there a line you would draw ? If so, at what point ?

The bold is mine.

He said there was an increase of $3000/month and then specified a 600% increase. A 600% increase on $600 equals $3,600.

No, he didn't say that. What he asked was "what if" as to make a point. He was questioning if there should be a limit and if so, how much. Kind of like what we do in the Minimum Wage discussions where somebody asks why not make MW $50.00 an hour?

Oh, my mistake. My apologies to those still in the thread. But it sounds like the sort of whine Protectless would post, in my opinion.

 

[JWBooth]

Is anyone else getting private messages from Protectionist? He can be damned annoying.

Nope and I am good with it.