If rent was just paying for the costs of utilities, insurance, taxes, general upkeep costs, and the mortgage for my unit I'd have no problem with it. When corporations start sucking up money to line the pockets of investors it becomes a problem.

[–] blazera@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

do you not think a landlord is by default an investor?

[–] Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Scalpers are investors of sorts, yes. Doesn't make it a good thing that we should have in society

[–] blazera@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago

Im the guy saying get rid of all landlords. Being investors is what makes them bad.

[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not playing word games today, sorry. In this context "investor" means someone who is investing in corporate ownership of housing.

[–] blazera@kbin.social -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Its no word game, this is layman's terms, rental properties are bought by investors. I just dont get why unincorporated investors also sucking up money get a pass.

[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago

Because it's greatly dependent on context. Someone with an ADU in their own back yard charging below market rent to a tenant (real life situation one of my friends is in, as the renter) is wildly different from Bill at the investor's meeting demanding they raise rent again because he wants to buy a fourth mansion. Investing any real energy in decrying the former while the latter still exists just seems like a stupid waste of time to me.