A possible progressive loophole in landlording - what am I getting wrong?

[Jasha]

Build more council houses then and reign in the housing benefit piggybank of the middle classes.

[Zetetic]

Is this fundamentally trying to badge rent controls in a more tolerable fashion in the hope that this makes smaller landlords whine less about them?

 

[TrenterPercenter]

Build more council houses then and reign in the housing benefit piggybank of the middle classes.

We can do more than one thing at a time.  There is also big advantages for separating those with second homes into ethical landlords and greedy landlords - it makes further policy movements in this domain more likely, seeks consent and appeals to the better nature of people - which is important for change.

[TrenterPercenter]

Is this fundamentally trying to badge rent controls in a more tolerable fashion in the hope that this makes smaller landlords whine less about them?

Yes.

Though it isn't "badging" it is different approach to means testing.

[chveik]

landlords will never vote against their class interests.

[Johnny Yesno]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jun/23/second-homes-uk-government-britain-housing-crisis

That is interesting, and support's The Dog's earlier post about there not being an actual shortage of houses.

I'm afraid it rather torpedoes your idea in the op, though. One way or the other, we're going to have to upset the asset-rich to fix the housing problem.

[touchingcloth]

No that is nice that you've got the place you want.  Of course the other thing is being mortgage free and wiring your disposables to charities etc... but I don't think this changes the system.  Just for clarity I'm not suggesting everyone buy a second home I'm saying those that do could have reasonable caps placed on them and these caps could be relative to the outstanding costs of their assets so that they can't just pass the cost of their second home onto others under the cover that it is costing them the same amount of money to service the mortgage as it was when they first bought it (plus all the issues that come with all the associated inequality).

Yeah, so really it's more a cap on how much second home owners can make from their first property than how much renters can be charged.

I get it, but it seems like it's a bit of a papering over the cracks of other issues, as the attractiveness of owning a second home should ideally be mitigated already through capital gains/inheritance/land value taxes, and there's the option of rent controls which aren't linked to the specifics of how much equity an owner has in their property which could benefit tenants.

[TrenterPercenter]

I'm afraid it rather torpedoes your idea in the op, though. One way or the other, we're going to have to upset the asset-rich to fix the housing problem.

Not sure why it torpedoes the idea - the number of people owning second homes is increasing and will continue to increase.

I appreciate the "upsetting the asset rich" issue but this is the problem people are not doing it.  There are lots of people that whilst they do not own a second home at the moment this will become a reality as time goes on because they will have the equity - this is a feature of assets (and over-valued assets).

Every homeowner with disposable income from paying off their mortgage will be a position to buy second home  we are moving towards this because of how the systems is setup it favours assets.

Of course hitting assets overall is the key but that is problematic because you are then saying to a massive voting block we are coming for your assets (i.e. your house whether you own part, all off or whatever).

[TrenterPercenter]

Yeah, so really it's more a cap on how much second home owners can make from their first property than how much renters can be charged.

Not just second homes any home that is generating money - in relation to its mortgage costs.

I get it, but it seems like it's a bit of a papering over the cracks of other issues, as the attractiveness of owning a second home should ideally be mitigated already through capital gains/inheritance/land value taxes, and there's the option of rent controls which aren't linked to the specifics of how much equity an owner has in their property which could benefit tenants.

I know this keeps being said but this largely a feature or selling and inheriting (and there is already ways around that).  It's not one or the other but I think we need to consider that these big changes are not happening but also there is no reason why they can't continue to be sought whilst doing other things.

[Johnny Yesno]

Yeah, so really it's more a cap on how much second home owners can make from their first property than how much renters can be charged.

I get it, but it seems like it's a bit of a papering over the cracks of other issues, as the attractiveness of owning a second home should ideally be mitigated already through capital gains/inheritance/land value taxes, and there's the option of rent controls which aren't linked to the specifics of how much equity an owner has in their property which could benefit tenants.

That's my feeling too. I'm not sure an approach that focuses on the link between rent and what reductions individual landlords can stand rather than one that focuses on affordability to tenants will result in any meaningful change.

[Johnny Yesno]

Not sure why it torpedoes the idea - the number of people owning second homes is increasing and will continue to increase.

It torpedoes the idea because those second homes aren't being let to tenants anyway.

Of course hitting assets overall is the key but that is problematic because you are then saying to a massive voting block we are coming for your assets (i.e. your house whether you own part, all off or whatever).

Yes, that's what we need to be saying. Those second homes should become unviable to own, for starters.

[Jasha]

Every homeowner with disposable income from paying off their mortgage will be a position to buy second home  we are moving towards this because of how the systems is setup it favours assets.

The only tenants they will support will be their kids as it's the only way of getting the offspring to leave home. Those that haven't remortgaged 6 times to pay for a new kitchen and holiday in the Seychelles and kids wedding that is.

[touchingcloth]

Not just second homes any home that is generating money - in relation to its mortgage costs.

"Any home that is generating money" seems like the kind of thing which is sadly too easy to fudge by the sorts of people who are already set against the idea of the social contract. Wouldn't something like a land value tax address a lot of the issues your idea is aimed at?

That's my feeling too. I'm not sure an approach that focuses on the link between rent and what reductions individual landlords can stand rather than one that focuses on affordability to tenants will result in any meaningful change.

I can't disagree with the sentiment of the OP at all, but on this point...

I know this keeps being said but this largely a feature or selling and inheriting (and there is already ways around that).  It's not one or the other but I think we need to consider that these big changes are not happening but also there is no reason why they can't continue to be sought whilst doing other things.

...I'm not sure it's a) a simple stepping stone towards the big changes, or b) would be warmly received by the usual suspects who would be against those big changes. In other words, I'm not sure any reframing of things will make the idea of more and different taxes more palatable to rich cunts, as they'll quite quickly work out whether any given policy is positive or negative to their bank balances and decide to support or oppose it from there.

[chveik]

Of course hitting assets overall is the key but that is problematic because you are then saying to a massive voting block we are coming for your assets (i.e. your house whether you own part, all off or whatever).

why would you look for landlord scum support, you can frame your policies however you want, they will still know they're going to lose their advantages.

[Buelligan]

The British housing market's like the diamond market - it's absolutely possible for everyone to have what they want but the people controlling the market make sure that the supply is kept artificially tight.  Until someone with the balls to end that gets some power, poor people will get screwed as hard as they dare.

[touchingcloth]

why would you look for landlord scum support, you can frame your policies however you want, they will still know they're going to lose their advantages.

It would be nice if we could pull the wool over the eyes of the scum with a simple reframing, but sadly people in the country at large rarely see taxation and wealth distribution as anything other than a negative. So fix that, Trenter. FIX THAT

[TrenterPercenter]

I can't.  This was just a brain fart at 7am this morning as I ate my gruel, it was just a thought. 

Kept us busy for a bit though.

[touchingcloth]

Unfortunately we now all blame you for the social ills of the 21st Century Why did you have to turn Great Britain into Broken Britain? 😢

[touchingcloth]

The British housing market's like the diamond market - it's absolutely possible for everyone to have what they want but the people controlling the market make sure that the supply is kept artificially tight.  Until someone with the balls to end that gets some power, poor people will get screwed as hard as they dare.

It's a good job the banks weren't able to keep control over the market when all of those homeowners defaulted on their mortgages in 2007.

[TrenterPercenter]

Unfortunately we now all blame you for the social ills of the 21st Century Why did you have to turn Great Britain into Broken Britain? 😢

Didn't read enough fuckin' Orwell did I 😔

[Johnny Yesno]

Didn't read enough fuckin' Orwell did I 😔

Check out Animal Inclosure.

[Zetetic]

Hardworking families, ethical landlords, forever England.

[Zetetic]

Experiments in 18thC and 19thC France found that functionally ethical landlords could exist for up to 4 or 5 seconds. Work with animal models in the Soviet Union suggested that this might be artificially prolonged to several minutes.

[touchingcloth]

I had an ethical, humane landlord for 3 three years in Bristol. Even when you do have a good landlord it doesn't help you feel secure in a tenancy, and if anything you become keenly aware of how easy it would be for their circumstances to change (he had a heart attack in our first year there, for instance) and for the property to be sold to your common or garden cunt of a rentier capitalist.

[TrenterPercenter]

Been very lucky with landlords over the years

A crusty that lived on a barge (was lovely)
A middle-aged fancy man who even came and helped me out when I had a problem with another property
A church
A sleeping landlord GP that spent most of their time out of the country
A couple who were really nice charged us below market rent and never put it up over our tenancy

I've not had a single problem with a landlord and just a minor issue with a letting agent regarding a deposit.

[touchingcloth]

A church

[Zetetic]

Even when you do have a good landlord it doesn't help you feel secure in a tenancy, and if anything you become keenly aware of how easy it would be for their circumstances to change (he had a heart attack in our first year there, for instance) and for the property to be sold to your common or garden cunt of a rentier capitalist.

Or simply for there to be a serious conflict between their profit and your shelter - the actual human doesn't need to die for the change in their circumstances to screw you over.

My landlord is a nice enough person as far as I can tell in their day-to-day dealings, who has invested their small amount of capital in the only prudent sector in the UK. That still puts him in a dangerous position of power over me, and puts out interests in conflict the moment we either of us stop being lucky.

[Zetetic]

It's worth noting that the situation in Bristol as a whole markedly improved over the last decade via the actions of community unions, including the creation and promotion of a charter and arbitration clauses in tenancy contracts that are all bound up with the power of ACORN there, and there ability to bring that power to bear against landlords when necessary.

[Zetetic]

The wider lesson of the last few decades of England should be that all private ownership of housing , including the infamous "owner-occupier", has a tendency to cause massive moral and political damage amongst those engaged in it.

[Sebastian Cobb]

Bit of a conflation between lack of rights in the british rental sector and inherent problems of landlording there I think.

Yes, renting is always exploitative at some level but there's also no reason it needs to be as precarious as it is either.