As throughly demonstrated in this thread - unless you go to extreme effort like threatening to take someone to court - Landlords hold all the power to set rates, increase rates, ignore complaints etc and there are almost no avenues for recompense.
So no, there can be no fair exchange when lambs negotiate with wolves.
I've rented from plenty like this, simply because I took the effort to find places that were locally owned (while not a cure all, it helps).
Also, whats the alternative? not everyone can meet the financial or responsibility requirements that come with homeownership. So what are you left with after that, government owned housing?
How about a system that doesn’t primarily benefit property owners?
> How about a system that doesn’t primarily benefit property owners?
Why would anyone want to own their house in a system that does not benefit them?
The deposit requirements are high to get a loan, now yes, we could change that thru subsidy or guaranty by the government.
But what about maintenance? renting is turn-key, even when your mortgage is lower than rent, you still have the unexpected costs that appear?
In the six months I've been here, I've had to replace or repair:
Garburator
Cooktop
Oven Coils
Shower Controls
Sink Faucets
A couple circuit breakers
Sprinklers (all of them, 80% of them were broken)
Also, yard maintenance is this ongoing battle, between tree droppings, grass mowing, and weed abatement (some of which you must do, like dealing with noxious vines).
If you wanna fix a greater social ill, the issue isn't 'benefitting owners' its that people have been conditioned to treat their home like an investment rather than a place to live and prosper in. Property Values shouldn't be going up 5x faster than inflation, but they have been for a couple decades.
We also had to replace:
Drywall due to mold issues
Leaking Laundry Valves (see above)
A leaking hose bib which necessitated sweating on new fittings
New fittings on the hot water heater (to add a shutoff)
Various other electrical work (replace outlets, retorque loose neutral, brought grounding most of the way up to modern code - house had no buried ground rod)
To make my point further - I've had many of these issues at an apartment, in my time living in apartments I've had the following work done in or around my unit:
Replacement of in wall heater
Replacement of Garburator
Replacement of Hot Water Heater
Replacement of Shower Vales
Replacement of AC Condenser
Replacement of Dishwasher
Replacement of Hot Water Heater (and remediation of the water damage from it)
Replacement of Water Faucets
Replacement of Load Center (Fuse Box)
Repair of Refrigerator and Stove
Installation of new landscaping (new sod, bushes, etc)
Repair/Replacement of Sprinklers
Repaving of parking area
Replacement of Roof
Painting
Replacement of Siding
Cleaning of HVAC Ducting
The total cost to me on all of these issues was zero dollars - and thats my point. Those multitude of repairs are not free when you own your home, and can often be quite costly.
In my experience (Owned 3 homes, rented 4 homes) it’s net-net between renting and owning across multiple factors including overall cost, and think I’m near the mean when it comes to handiwork - so it’s not like I’m doing all my electrical and HVAC myself and I’m in an expensive area.
Yes, all of the costs are just baked into rent. They're not baked into a Mortgage, and people dont get that so they end up buying as much house as their rent was, and then get over their skis when they suddenly need to cough up 15k for a new roof?
If you're in the position where even paying the rent consistently is a marginally difficult problem, even if lending standards are relaxed sufficiently, how is this person going to pay for a new roof unless the price of that loan is subsidized to the point that it either has a zero or negative interest rate?
Not everyone can buy - either because of the work required, or because of the financial outlays needed. Also to be honest, not everyone wants that responsibility.
Please just do a smidgen of research
You're mostly right though, so long as housing is consistently treated as an investment rather than a commodity produced and sold in bulk, landlords hold all of the power.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/commodity
People who criticize the commodification of housing I think tend to believe the correct and valid definition is:
(2) something useful or valued.
or
(5) one that is subject to ready exchange or exploitation within a market. (emphasis added)
I tend to focus on:
(1c) a mass-produced unspecialized product.
or
(4) a good or service whose wide availability typically leads to smaller profit margins and diminishes the importance of factors (such as brand name) other than price.
Housing was commodified after WWII, when we stamped out so much housing, it was cheap and available to everyone. When housing is that available, it removes much of the power of landlords to distort the market.