• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If you lose your job, do you still have a moral duty to pay your rent on time?

If you lose your job, do you still have a moral duty to pay your rent on time?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 42 62.7%

  • No.

    Votes: 9 13.4%

  • Depends on the circumstances.

    Votes: 15 22.4%

  • Undecided, no opinion.

    Votes: 1 1.5%
  • Total voters
    67
joko104 said:
One reason rents are so high is landlords have to cover bum and trash tenants who destroy the property and for how long the landlord goes with no rent for months if having to go thru the entire eviction process - and then usually the evicted deadbeat tenant tears up the property when they are finally forced out by the Sheriff's Department.
Click to expand...

Its always been that way.

The real driver is the peasants for pensions movement. No more pensions, so better get some tenants to feed off of in your retirement.

And charge them your mortgage payment, and insurance if the market will bear it

This takes homes off the market for people who want to buy one to live in. Which drives up the cost and means they feed a landlord longer. And the higher house prices justify those landlords raising the rent so that just adds more months before ownership.

To make matters worse, after the crash when all that capital was laying around a lot of it went to buy residential real estate. So there are huge corporate landlords too.

Its an ugly trend, and if this gets bad a bunch more homes will end up in corporate hands.
 
phattonez said:
You have hundreds of thousands in equity that you did nothing to earn. You just happened to be young when prices were cheap. Pipe down.
Click to expand...

Ever heard the story of the ant and the grasshopper? She's the ant. From your messages, you're the grasshopper.

The Ant and the Grasshopper - Wikipedia

Why should landlords have to provide free housing to drug addicts, alcoholics and lazy ass bums? No one gave the rental property to the landlord.

Why don't you have rental property you let other people live in for free? Why are you exempt from your own moral rantings and sobbing?
 
joko104 said:
Ever heard the story of the ant and the grasshopper? She's the ant. From your messages, you're the grasshopper.

The Ant and the Grasshopper - Wikipedia

Why should landlords have to provide free housing to drug addicts, alcoholics and lazy ass bums? No one gave the rental property to the landlord.

Why don't you have rental property you let other people live in for free? Why are you exempt from your own moral rantings and sobbing?
Click to expand...

"Go to the ant, you lazy one; Observe its ways and become wise." Proverbs 6:6
 
mike2810 said:
and you have not answered any of my questions.

There are many things that can happen if the units are not rented out.
The landlord gets foreclosed on the property if they don't own them outright, The landlord sells the property to someone else are two possibilities.
Another is they reduce the asking rent and someone who can afford that rate rents them.

So are you going to answer my questions or still dodge them?
Click to expand...

He doesn't answer questions. He dodges and throws out another beggar-bum slogan.
 
Ahlevah said:
Me, too, but I have a feeling things are going to get pretty testy before this is all over, stimulus or not. Probably more than a few landlords are mortgaged to the hilt and need those rent checks coming in to avoid the threat of foreclosure.
Click to expand...

Thankfully part of the stimulus should help banks as well and I know many banks are granting payment deferrals and being pretty lenient with repayment at this time.
 
phattonez said:
You see this whole post? Slap a big CITATION NEEDED all over it.
Click to expand...

Why? You provide never provide citations for any claims you make about landlords.

Anyone with a new car, anyone with a new I-phone, anyone who buys cups of coffee at Starbucks, C-stores and fast foods, has no basis to make any complaint that they can't pay rent, have no emergency money, that they can not pay their college loans and credit card debts, don't have a down payment on a home or are economically distressed.
 
What if...? said:
Its always been that way.

The real driver is the peasants for pensions movement. No more pensions, so better get some tenants to feed off of in your retirement.

And charge them your mortgage payment, and insurance if the market will bear it

This takes homes off the market for people who want to buy one to live in. Which drives up the cost and means they feed a landlord longer. And the higher house prices justify those landlords raising the rent so that just adds more months before ownership.

To make matters worse, after the crash when all that capital was laying around a lot of it went to buy residential real estate. So there are huge corporate landlords too.

Its an ugly trend, and if this gets bad a bunch more homes will end up in corporate hands.
Click to expand...

The super rick win big time out of situations like this, just like they are making a killing on the stock market now.

In my opinion, the motives of this are all economic. This is causing a massive shift of wealth from the middle class to the super rich.

Already, the super rich internationalists with their Chinese sweatshop factories are claiming they should be rewards by erasing over half a billion dollars in tariffs against China - all that will go into the pockets of the richest corporations and people on earth. Thankfully, President Trump continues to say NO to lifting tariffs on China.
 
What if...? said:
Its illegal though, to live in your car or pitch a tent under a bridge. They tolerate as much as they have to because of the homeless, but they hate RV and car people.
Click to expand...

Yes, people have never liked it when bums, alcoholics and drug addicts form enclaves in their community. While there are exceptions (the mentally ill and those who experience true bad luck), most are just bums. They used to be called hobos. Anyone has a right to live that way, but no one has a moral duty to give their own money to do so.

Around here they are called forest people. They live in small groups in tents in the woods usually near a WalMart, grocery store or where there is a collection of restaurants. Most have bicycles they stole. They beg in the parking lot until the Sheriff's department runs them off and often will go into fast foods restaurants begging for food. It is give to them because they are dirty, stink and people will turn around and walkout - so they are given food to get them to go away.

Our business used to hire those who accepted a job offer and we pay exceptionally well for zero skills jobs. Minimally, they would have over $600 in their pocket each pay day (a 40 hour 9-5 week). Almost none would accept. Of those who did, 100% quit by their second week and most when they got their first pay. Nearly half wouldn't finish the week. They don't want to work. They want to get stoned and drunk. It is a lifestyle they WANT, not one they are forced into. They are bums and beggars. That is the life they want. They have a right to be a bum. But nobody owes them a dime.
 
Last edited:
Bullseye said:
Yes, we do:

Here's a summary of California rent control laws

Prop 13 laws get reset to current value every time property changes hands.
Click to expand...
The way it's set up leads to massive investment from people who never sell because of the tax breaks.
53ed6a9134512fff67bce35f43e7b262.jpg
 
AmNat said:
There are many government policies that might be a good idea in the abstract. The problem with interventions in the economy is that they produce complicated, and often unexpected, secondary and tertiary effects. That's fine if your government has an actual dictator like Franco or Mussolini at the helm, or even a virtual dictator like FDR. But our government is notoriously inefficient and divided against itself, so just because you were able to implement some preferred policy, doesn't mean you'll have the political capital to implement necessary responses to its secondary effects (in fact you'll probably be less likely to have the required political capital, having spent what you did have on the original policy). Because of that, I tend to be wary of proposed policies which are complicated in their application or that require significant ongoing maintenance.
Click to expand...
No better time to institute a dictatorship than now!
 
mike2810 said:
and you have not answered any of my questions.

There are many things that can happen if the units are not rented out.
The landlord gets foreclosed on the property if they don't own them outright, The landlord sells the property to someone else are two possibilities.
Another is they reduce the asking rent and someone who can afford that rate rents them.

So are you going to answer my questions or still dodge them?
Click to expand...
So they're sold to future owner occupiers, reducing demand for rentals. Exactly my point.
 
phattonez said:
The way it's set up leads to massive investment from people who never sell because of the tax breaks.
53ed6a9134512fff67bce35f43e7b262.jpg
Click to expand...

And MORE creative number crunching. :roll:
 
Ahlevah said:
I would say yes, you do, although under the circumstances I think it would be a dick move for a landlord to issue a three-day notice to pay rent or a two-week eviction notice. But, yeah, this is why it is imperative that families set aside funds for emergencies and unforeseen events like this pandemic. You shouldn't demand charity. Living in a private apartment or home owned by someone else isn't a right.
Click to expand...

The landlord and tennent should meet on the issue.
 
joko104 said:
Ever heard the story of the ant and the grasshopper? She's the ant. From your messages, you're the grasshopper.

The Ant and the Grasshopper - Wikipedia

Why should landlords have to provide free housing to drug addicts, alcoholics and lazy ass bums? No one gave the rental property to the landlord.

Why don't you have rental property you let other people live in for free? Why are you exempt from your own moral rantings and sobbing?
Click to expand...
Lol, always resorting to straw men. The sign that you can't even argue your position.
 
joko104 said:
Yes, people have never liked it when bums, alcoholics and drug addicts form enclaves in their community. While there are exceptions (the mentally ill and those who experience true bad luck), most are just bums. They used to be called hobos. Anyone has a right to live that way, but no one has a moral duty to give their own money to do so.

Around here they are called forest people. They live in small groups in tents in the woods usually near a WalMart, grocery store or where there is a collection of restaurants. Most have bicycles they stole. They beg in the parking lot until the Sheriff's department runs them off and often will go into fast foods restaurants begging for food. It is give to them because they are dirty, stink and people will turn around and walkout - so they are given food to get them to go away.

Our business used to hire those who accepted a job offer and we pay exceptionally well for zero skills jobs. Minimally, they would have over $600 in their pocket each pay day (a 40 hour 9-5 week). Almost none would accept. Of those who did, 100% quit by their second week and most when they got their first pay. Nearly half wouldn't finish the week. They don't want to work. They want to get stoned and drunk. It is a lifestyle they WANT, not one they are forced into. They are bums and beggars. That is the life they want. They have a right to be a bum. But nobody owes them a dime.
Click to expand...
$600 per day? For bums? I'm calling BS. The median millennial salary is less than $30k. That's around $600 per WEEK.
 
Bullseye said:
You post a chart of manufactured numbers and expect to prove what?
Click to expand...
If you're not interested in reality then why are you arguing this point? You clearly would rather rag on people you hate than talk about truth.
 
phattonez said:
I see your argument consists of willing ignorance. FASCINATING!
Click to expand...
My arguments comprise laughing at the manufactured "statistics" you spew.
 
Elvira said:
David said...

"I have been young and have been old, and have never seen an honest man left in the lurch and his offspring hunting for bread." 37:25

I have full confidence in that...
Click to expand...

David didnt have cable TV.
 
Bullseye said:
My arguments comprise laughing at the manufactured "statistics" you spew.
Click to expand...
Yes, the Federal Reserve makes up numbers. You're so afraid of reality.
 
joko104 said:
The super rick win big time out of situations like this, just like they are making a killing on the stock market now.

In my opinion, the motives of this are all economic. This is causing a massive shift of wealth from the middle class to the super rich.

Already, the super rich internationalists with their Chinese sweatshop factories are claiming they should be rewards by erasing over half a billion dollars in tariffs against China - all that will go into the pockets of the richest corporations and people on earth. Thankfully, President Trump continues to say NO to lifting tariffs on China.
Click to expand...

China doesn't pay the tariffs.

Importers pay the tariffs, then pass them on to their customers.

American consumers ultimately pay the tariffs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom