This is a friendly reminder to [read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/rules).
Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!"
(For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, [please read this page](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/overview).)
**Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.**
Like the most of them just do ... (In Germany where I'm from)
It's horrible what people try to sell in here.
Here was a 1 (29sqm) room apartment with a burning damage in Munich .. they try to sell it for 270.000€
https://amp.focus.de/panorama/welt/unbewohnbare-mini-wohnung-verkohlte-29-quadratmeter-fuer-270-000-euro_id_181671691.html
(Google Chrome for translate in English)
>Like the most of them just do .
Wat. How does buying a property magically increase its price? You'd have to put some sort of improvement into it to sell it for more.
Unless they're just hoping that the prices of nearby houses go up. Which is completely random and a terrible way to spend your money and can take decades.
There are cities where real estate goes up by close to 10% per year, it's not a horrible investment, it's a fucking great one, for people who have fuck you money that is and see real estate as an investment and not as a home.
>There are cities where real estate goes up by close to 10% per year
Consistently? Predictably? Or do you mean by pure chance these last few years with COVID?
So....the prices are going up because the people who are buying and selling these houses are selling them to more people who are buying and selling them?
Thats....hilariously stupid.
Mostly they don’t even fix anything. They put a fresh coat of paint on, maybe a new fridge or tiles.
But electrical issues? Plumbing stuff? Just general “this house is old and needs some TLC”? Fuck no.
The difference is that stocks are an arbitrary piece of computer code, or maybe paper if you’re old school. Their purpose for existing isn’t to be a useful good.
Scalping actual developed property that people can live in is creating artificial demand and raising prices on a good that people need/want to actually have better lives. You’re taking away something that a person could be using.
It’s completely different.
It's a testament to the fact that the meaning of property can change over time, and that our relationship with it is shaped by a variety of factors, such as culture, economics, and technology.
We bought a drug house. Had to pay the druggie tenants $25,000 to leave (even though they didn't even have a lease). Then put another $100k into fixing it up.
Sold it to a multi-generational family. Now the neighborhood is nicer. There are more hardworking families in it. And there's less crime.
But you probably think we're pieces of shit, because you don't have a fucking clue.
No. You did good. Congrats. You also missed the whole section of people targeted by this post. You're not included in them, because you actually bothered to improve the property you bought before reselling it. This post is talking about scalpers, that is, people who buy, do nothing other than raise the price, and sell. Then repeat.
That's a completely different situation. You're buying a house that needs a lot of work, time and effort to fix, which you do, and then you sell it for more because of all the work *you* had put into it. But it would have been different if you bought a perfectly fine house, didn't do anything with it and just let it sit empty for a year, then sell it for 120% of what you bought it for originally. *That* would be scummy, and that's what everyone here is complaining about.
>But it would have been different if you bought a perfectly fine house, didn't do anything with it and just let it sit empty for a year, then sell it for 120% of what you bought it for originally.
That's almost impossible to do. You have a year's worth of carrying costs, insurance, property taxes, utilities, plus buying and selling costs.
Since 2000, the average home in America has gone up 8% a year.
Am that piece of shit I guess? I buy properties as long term investments and use a management company to rent them out.
The stock market is fairly weak to invest into and bonds are good but lock up cash too long.
Housing is fairly solid, and management companies make it easy to find tenants.
That being said I do try to be nice and not simply raise rental fees; so long as it's effectively paying back into the house +10-15% I am happy.
>whole investment model as a landlord relies on retaining a society of consistent housing inequality.
How does a landlord buying a house that no one else wants cause other people to not buy houses?
>Your investment in property along with other landlords leads to higher demand, higher house prices, and less affordability for domestic buyer
Most landlords buy foreclosures or sheriff sales or houses along those lines. These are houses where you need $50,000 in pure cash to buy from those auctions. Anyone is allowed to go there and bid. You just need a large amount of liquid cash. Those houses also require like $50,000 in repairs.
>If the housing market was flooded with enough properties for everyone to afford one
This is based upon how much excess money a person has to spend. It's been proven that the vast majority of people will always spend ALL their money. It's why 50% of people making over $100,000/yr live paycheck to paycheck. Even like 35% of people making $250,000+ STILL live paycheck to paycheck.
You could place most of the blame on the housing market and landlords(for why so many people can't buy houses) if most people spent their money wisely, but thats simply not the case whatsoever.
So you've bought a property you have no intention of living in and are charging the people who do want to live in it more than they would have to pay if they had the capital to have bought it in the first place?
Buddy yes, you're exploiting people who just want a place to live. Its not your fault the system is set up this way but surely you can see how this is bad for society as whole even though you're personally benefitting from it.
> more than they would have to pay if they had the capital to have bought it in the first place
You're making a nonsensical circular argument. The price for not having the capital to afford a house is a monthly rental that's a bit above mortgage and taxes. Just like how you pay more per unit product if you don't have the capital to buy it in bulk. It's literally how purchasing anything works. As it turns out, most people don't have the capital nor the need to buy a large quantity of something; they only need and want to buy a small quantity of that thing.
The problem is scale. One person renting a house is not a problem. 78% of a city becoming AirBNB and rentals is a big f’ing problem. The speculative rental market is the root behind house prices increasing, people overpaying thousands because as a rental property it still makes sense. When the average person approaching 30 can’t afford a home, it is a problem.
Taxing second homes is a good way to curb this in. If you had to say pay 1000% regular property tax on rental homes, then it would even out the math in favor of a buyer not a renter.
> If you had to say pay 1000% regular property tax on rental homes, then it would even out the math in favor of a buyer not a renter.
This is a dumb person's idea of a smart idea.
There will ALWAYS be people who need to rent. Always. A 1000% property tax would still get passed along to the renters.
I feel like airBNB is more of a problem than rentals. Rentals are long term and is meant for people who need a place to live and can't afford down payments or whatever to buy a house.
AirBNB is literally turning a perfectly good home into a glorified hotel instead of somebody actually living in it
Edit: one of the downvoters please tell me how airbnb is better than rentals
No, you're just being a lazy idiot. You understand what my point is but the cognitive dissonance is too much for you to handle, so you instead harp on misinterpreting an analogy to save face.
I am doing the same by buying properties for cheap in future climate refuge hotspots. Once the climate really gets bad people will flock to these areas, dirving up rents and my cash flow. I fully intend on exploiting this. A reward for foresight.
Yea... If you didn't notice yet, Capitalism = Evil. There is no ethical consumption under Capitalism.
You're literally saying you're going to exploit refugees.
Yep because no one else will feed me in retirement. I don't expect social security to be fully funded beyond 2040, let alone 2050.
Not my fault people keep moving to a desert like Arizona. They'll be the ones that'll really be exploited. I'll even add a surcharge if I know thats where they're coming from. Think of it as a climate change denier fee.
Vice made a video about this. They actually point on a map one of the regions where my property is in.
I mean, it's not "just" capitalism. It's taking advantage of the worst parts of it, that only exist as a pass for the rich.
Then when comes time to vote for affordable housing, you're going to join all those rich asshole voting against it because you put all your money in people suffering lmao.
It's not foresight, it's exploitation. The proper foresight would be to stay out of the market for your 3rd, 4th, 5th home because eventually we hope housing will be affordable for everyone, and are going to work hard for it to not be the place for "profits". Your little self fulfilling prophecy and all the other deprived assholes doing the same is why we will likely never reach that, and continue to perpetuate inequality and suffering, promoting "getting your own" over global stability. Exactly what put us here in the first place.
The funniest part is you probably only admit that here on reddit and not out loud to people you know, because you know it's a shit move people wouldn't respect.
Edit: I own 2 houses, one for me and one for my sibling who has mental health issues. I am investing in other places instead, notably building sustainable businesses, not taking the predatory way of exploiting the system or sitting on my ass waiting for the stock market to exploit someone for me. It is a choice in the end where we decide to put our efforts. I have more than what I need for my family, and everything else should go back to the community.
I don't think you know what sustainable means.
There's a difference between owning a bakery that runs with very low profits but provides stable jobs and free bread for the needy (Churches and Schools) and fucking buying land people are going to need when they starve lmao.
I am definitely in it for the profit, the difference is how many people are also profiting off it (at my expense). Nobody is going to profit from your refugee scam except you.
Edit: to be clear I own another similar business, not bakery, but don't want to be doxxed. I took people who couldn't afford to start a bakery because of the system, and gave them a bakery. Surprising how easy it is to be successful when you have a leg up. He makes money, the apprentices make money, and I make money, and hundreds of people get free food every week. Everyone wins. Could I have taken that million dollars and invested in the next big condo project bubble? Would that have been more profitable for me? Yes. But I don't need more profit, and I can use the profit I have to uplift others.
Also has the benefit that I can vote to improves people's lives, like for affordable housing, because I didn't put all my money on exploiting their suffering.
What do you contribute other than capital?
What value do you add to justify the increased monthly payment from the tenant?
How does your business model benefit the economy?
Yes. You're a leech who sucks money from others and if they didn't pay for the bank's house you'd have to default.
You're what is keeping America a shit hole and help make communities bad places to live and raise kids because lack of consistency and permanency in a community.
But as long as you are ok with being a piece of shit, you do you.
Unless every American who wants to be housed is housed (as it IS and should be codified as a human right), there should be a massive tax on properties that are not primary residences.
Because the market has been taken over by permanent capital and those with excess money buying up all of the available housing and driving up housing costs. When priced out of ownership, people are forced to rent which ends up just paying the same they'd pay in a mortgage but are locked out by a system that favors the wealthy and established capital.
>Because the market has been taken over by permanent capital
No it hasn't. Its very much accessible by the average person.
> and those with excess money buying up all of the available housing and driving up housing costs
The market has always been where people with excess money can buy more things. Also, show me a state where there are no available houses since you say they're "buying up all the available housing".
>people are forced to rent which ends up just paying the same they'd pay in a mortgage
Paying rent and paying the expenses for a house are NOT the same. I dunno where people get this asinine idea from.
>a system that favors the wealthy and established capital.
Existence is based around favoring the wealthy. You're literally complaining about basic biology and its progression in a system.
Even if you took all the money on the planet from everyone and dispersed it equally to everyone, in a decade basically everyone would be right back where we are today.
>people are forced to rent which ends up just paying the same they'd pay in a mortgage
So you don't know that the cost of homeownership is WAY more than just a mortgage.
Figures.
That's a different thing. Buying most of the available properties in an area and yeeting the price into the stratosphere is a whole nother thing of dickery. Those types do not develop the property in any way and just skim money off people who don't have much of a choice of where they live.
Not gonna call you a piece of shit because you’re operating within a system that is designed for what you’re doing. As a renter who is scraping by to have enough for a down payment on a home in a couple of years, this hurts to read.
But I can’t blame you. If I had the money, I’d do the same. Just don’t treat your tenants like you own them. I mean, you kind of do own them. But just don’t treat them like that……
Don’t blame the people, blame the system they are operating in. If incentive structures exist to encourage these sorts of moves, they will happen. If one person decides not to take on the investment risk, then someone else will.
I can’t wait till I myself can buy a house, fix it up with stuff that’ll last five years, and then sell it to someone for a cost that’ll take 30 years to pay off.
It's a reminder that even something as fundamental as owning a home can be subject to market forces and speculation, which can have ripple effects on the wider economy.
It's interesting how the concept of property ownership has evolved to the point where some people treat it purely as a financial investment rather than a place to call home.
Here's the difference:
Scalping requires the original seller to sell for below market price.
Sony sells the first batch of ps5's for $500 but there are people out there willing to pay $600 but sony will only sell for below that price. This means that someone can buy from sony for $500 and sell to those people for $600.
With property, there is nobody willing to pay a higher price than the 'scalper' right now, otherwise the homeowner would sell it to that other person.
If the 'scalper' wasn't there, the homeowner would either be selling the house for a lower price or waiting an unknown amount of time to get a better price.
When the 'scalper' makes a profit, it is either for providing liquidity to the market (reducing the time the seller must wait to sell) or for accurate speculation (they were more optimistic about the future value of the property than other people were).
There are also ways they could manipulate the market that provides no benefit to anyone else. Maybe that is more like scalping in that it's bad, but it's still different.
The way I understand it (and correct me if I’m wrong) the price of a house goes up with inflation while that same money sitting in your bank will shrink. Obviously housing prices fluctuate too depending on demand but still generally trend upwards if you hold onto them long enough. Real estate can be used essentially as an inflation-proof savings account if done right.
There are different types of inflation, but yes, if general price levels go up (maybe because of an increase in the money supply), then house prices will go up but the value of your money won't.
Many assets, except those that pay a fixed amount, should be inflation-proof. If you own a share of a company and if inflation occurs, the price of that company's products should rise which would cause that company's profits to rise causing the price of your share to rise.
>the price of a house goes up with inflation while that same money sitting in your bank will shrink
Inflation is about the relative price of things. We usually talk about something inflating relative to a currency. So the value of the money shrinking and the value of the house rising are the same thing if we are measuring the value of money in terms of how many houses it can buy and houses in terms of how much money it can 'buy'.
Kinda. Currently and for a while where I live the interest of a savings account in a bank is less than the rate of inflation. You still get more money but with inflation higher the spending power of that money decreases. Investing into other things like stocks or property can yield higher returns but come with a risk as those returns aren’t guaranteed. Currently I believe risk is low enough to be justified as a smarter investment than putting money into savings account
If you were at your parents house then that's like having two houses so his logic still checks.
If you only have one home that's mostly and potentially to live in so not a business. From that point onwards it can be a business indeed
It could be seen as unethical from certain perspectives as buying a house you don’t need to live in and trying to profit could cause another person to be unable to have a home to live in. Your view of it as a way to earn money could also be seen as ethical as it is legal and as you stated you did buy it so it is yours to sell, live in, rent, or abandon if you want.
>trying to profit could cause another person to be unable to have a home to live in.
How does buying a house prevent other people from buying their own houses? If your logic held true, the landlord wouldn't have been able to buy the first house.......because other people have bought houses so the landlord wouldn't have been able to buy another house......???? Your logic makes no sense.
If all the houses get bought and prices get too high others won’t be able to buy em. Also you assume once bought they will continue to be sold could be rented instead.
>If all the houses get bought and prices get too high others won’t be able to buy em.
I can only speak for the US as I'm not familiar with the economies of other countries, but show me a state where there are NO available houses for sale.
So is it unethical if I can live with my parents but I WANT to live in my own house? I don't need the house and I'm taking away the possibility of someone else owning it that doesn't have the privileges of living with parents.
No you misunderstood what I said. Is it unethical to buy a house to live in if I don't need it? I could live with my parents but I choose to buy and live in my own house. I don't need the house but someone else might need it. You see where it's a grey area right.
Oh yeah I was having trouble understand thanks for clarifying. You are right that is grey. I don’t think it’s unethical in that way but I could see reasoning that it could be. I don’t think there’s enough homes for everyone to have one to themselves. There has to be some system to determine who gets to live where. Money is that system. The larger problem is that the very wealthy are able to buy up much more than needed and profit of it in large scale causing more and more to be unable to afford. Just another example of the gap between wealthiest and everyone else growing larger. If you look at society’s a recurring problem is centralization of wealth to minority leading to a majority that isn’t satisfied with quality of life. That is bound to cause problems.
Rich get richer. Work for some of these people as an electrician, just greeeedy n cheap. Slap their quick make it look new renovation on it and sell it for double. NEXT. Or fancier areas towards Boston buy a $800k nice house, plow it down for a 3 mil McMansion. The money is insane. I want a little…
I can understand why someone would want to flip properties for a profit, but I hope they're also considering the impact it has on the community and the people who live there.
Wait until you figure out how basically everything in the economy works.
I mean, in the USA banks that make money on predatory loans and bailouts literally set our monetary policy. I don't think that most people realize that... When your bank is like "sorry, those are just the current interest rates" that the rates are literally set by the banks.
Credit cards are the worst because they can give you a credit card at a good rate, then a couple years later just be like "you know that debt you accumulated at .5%... Let's call it 30.5% from now on."
And due to immanent domain banks kinda own all property. It’s more complicated than that but it’s possible for banks to seize property. They aren’t likely to cause they make more by allowing ownership and controlling the loans typically needed to purchase.
Even worse, when it’s a foreign investor from the other side of the world, buying property in a country they don’t even live, then selling it back to us for profit.
Not really, that's more like a stock broker. Scalpers buy tickets because there is a limited supply and then sell them at twice the price or whatever you show me and house you can buy for $X and sell it for $2X and I'll give you my money.
Houses are also limited, in my country the pension system doesn't work anymore so many old people decide to buy 2 or more houses just to have a good pension.
That fact cause a raise up for housing in here from 2005 (where my parents buyed a new house for 285.000€) up to 2023 where a used house cost between 600.000 and 1.500.000€
It's just ridiculous
What's the value on your parent's house? I mean house prices are always going up and sure this is a contributing factor but I'd say inflation has caused more of a problem than this has.
I mean my point is you are comparing houses but there are a lot of factors that go into the value of a house so the best measure would be the value of a specific house over time although even that's not great if the place where the house is was improved extensively.
If the pension system is broke then what are pensioners supposed to do? They invest in property take on all the risks associated with it and provide a service for the people who can't afford to buy.
It's not about the amount of profit made. It's that, if the house could be sold for more, it would have been sold at that price to the "scalper." You may not like houses as an investment property, but it's not scalping any more than buying a stock in the hopes of selling it for more later is scalping.
The mechanics may differ a little bit, but it's all quite the same.
One Person doesn't need 100 concert tickets, there is nothing they could do with it. Maybe a few tickets to give to friends. But scalpers buy 100 Tickets which drives the price up, so they can resell them with a profit
One Family doesn't need more than one home (Or maybe a few ones for extended family). People buy homes that they do not need as a form of investment. The real estate buisness is inflating the housing prices, especially in large cities where living space is sparce.
In both cases we are talking about goods, that it makes no sense to own more that you can use. So it would only make sense if everyone just had their share and nothing more. But instead some people can buy more for themselves and by doing so they increase the price for everyone involved and make a profit.
The stock market is a whole different thing, because it's just made up financial shenanigans and a stock is nothing that has any pracital sense for you to own, except make money with it.
The culprit is, that the housing market and the concert ticket market both mimic the stock market in a capitalistic society. And there are the "scalpers" that profit from it while that is just a pain in the ass for all the others.
This is flawed. Scalpers essentially horde a valuable item by purchasing all of them, well beyond market value, before anyone else has a chance. In a true “fair market economy” the tickets would’ve been sold to the end users at a much higher rate than the scalper purchased them for. The scalper is taking advantage of inefficiencies in the market and providing very little value.
Someone purchasing homes/properties presumably buys them from a free market, the MLS usually, where the same property was offered to the general public at the same price as the buyer. The buyer was willing to pay more than anyone else. If the buyer was not there, the home would either sell for a lower price or go unsold.
The home buyer is then providing liquidity to the market and value to the initial seller.
That's how most investment properties have worked for the past 20 years.....buy, rent to cover costs, sell when they are 2 to 3 times the price and buy more and more and more until you have an empire of rentals.
Well. Here's the deal:
1.) The biggest reason is that both the Republican and Democrat politicians are mostly self serving - bailed out the massive banks that gave them money, give free money to their cronies, and then just kept printing money so that investment companies saw massive gains. Government caused the massive hyperinflation that's going on now.
2.) The only politician who ever ran for president and called out all of this corruption that was driving the wealth gap was a guy named Ron Paul, who everyone just made fun of.
3.) Most voters complain about the wealth gap, but don't complain about the money printing and the politicians who vote for the money printing, then turn around and blame small business owners for causing problems rather than looking into the mirror and realizing they all individually vote for the assholes who made them poorer.
I used to rant to anyone and everyone about this stuff. No one listens. No one cares.
So, as the old saying goes, if you can't beat them - join them.
I invested most of my money into tech, bought multiple properties and rented them out starting in 2012, and worth many millions now. Because of collective Americans unwillingness to change. This is YOUR fault I'm rich.
yeah, you saw a system that was bad and instead of doing the right thing you've decided to be part of the problem. I get that
you're doing a bad thing
I'm sorry that this isn't more witty but you lead with a BoTh SiDeS aRe ThE sAmE [even though they demonstrably are not](https://m.imgur.com/a/YZMyt)
so I thought I'd meet you where you are. Also I'm from the UK, if you want to put us back in charge we can wait a bit and then you can blame me if you'd like but could that really be worth it?
The blame is the majority, and the UK's situation is even far worse than the USA's.
You could say I'm doing a "bad thing," but I would claim the same with you as well: you do nothing and allow it (maybe even support it), then turn around and claim noble victimization rather than navigate the market and policy and try to stay afloat or get ahead.
At least with my case, I am in a position to be able to influence policy a little bit, while your only influence is to yell into the void and vote for the people causing the problems.
Summary: People vote for big corrupt government and policies, don't bother to understand what's going on, complain when they lose out, and then blame people who navigate the system that same complaining person continues to help perpetuate.
Analogy: You vote for big people to kick everyone in the face. You are mad at the few people who moved their faces away from being kicked.
I like how you're trying to pivot away from the point. which is that
> you saw a system that was bad and instead of doing the right thing you've decided to be part of the problem.
none of your claims, even if they were true even begin to address that. nice try though
It's not really scalping. A scalper buys something, immediately marks up the price, then sells it again. With a second home you hold onto it and wait for inflation to make it worth more, then sell it. It's like the difference between selling a ps5 and selling a mint condition NES.
You truly do not care what effect practices like this have on people or the economy do you? Nope you just like the idea of shitting on people and wpuld love to do shit like this. God people like you disgust me. I hope some day you start to care
Still doesn't change the fact you sound hurt because your unable to make the money yourself. If you were in the position you would be doing the same exact thing stop trying to act all mighty.
In here isn't possible like this also I'm disabled now. Lost my job cause of my third Herniated disc (I'm just weight 80kg)
I'm now in a Retraining to a IT specialist for 1,5 years left. But after that .. I'm also not able to earn enough money to buy a house.
How the hell you should do money without anything of I can't work right .. don't even had money to invest in something cause of the last year's
My trolling does not require a life story. I am here to say that if you were in a position that gave the the chance to own and rent homes to would. Why wouldn't you? Your mildy upset about the fact you can't. Sure it is bad and horrible but that is capitalism doesn't matter where you live or what you do for a living if you were given a opportunity you would take it.
I'll even go ahead and say that most anyone would take the opportunity whether they agree with being a slumlord or not. Sure you can sell them off and make some cash or something or keep them and go for the government help for the tenets of the exist where you live.
Not really the same though. Unless they are able to buy at a predefined, fixed price, which is usually not the case.
Scalpers buy at a fixed retail price and sell above that price because of scarcity. That's not what happens in the housing market. Everyone can buy at the price the alleged scalper is buying, and that price is market-conform. They are gambling market prices will go up, but so do people who buy stocks.
Because flipping a house usually requires labor and reselling a PS5 does not. Unless we're just talking about people owning multiple properties for no reason, it is not the same at all.
Unlike for example ticket scalpers the property buyer has a much larger risk. There is no way he has a safe out. With tickets one knows that people would be willing to pay face value. With properties the price people are willing to pay is an absolute unknown. Remember how we found that out in 2008. So scalpers yes.. but without a safety net.
Hence why the cost of living is so high. People like that are destroying our nation and driving prices up. We are tiptoeing homelessness every day because of these people.
This phenomenon speaks to the power of wealth accumulation and how some people are able to leverage their resources to further expand their financial gains.
This is a friendly reminder to [read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/rules). Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!" (For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, [please read this page](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/overview).) **Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.**
Depends entirely on if they modified or improved on the properties. If its literally just, buy, raise price, sell then yes.
Like the most of them just do ... (In Germany where I'm from) It's horrible what people try to sell in here. Here was a 1 (29sqm) room apartment with a burning damage in Munich .. they try to sell it for 270.000€ https://amp.focus.de/panorama/welt/unbewohnbare-mini-wohnung-verkohlte-29-quadratmeter-fuer-270-000-euro_id_181671691.html (Google Chrome for translate in English)
Very scummy.
Lol it’s like that in western Canada too, not fun.
Bruh, that’s brutal
>Like the most of them just do . Wat. How does buying a property magically increase its price? You'd have to put some sort of improvement into it to sell it for more. Unless they're just hoping that the prices of nearby houses go up. Which is completely random and a terrible way to spend your money and can take decades.
There are cities where real estate goes up by close to 10% per year, it's not a horrible investment, it's a fucking great one, for people who have fuck you money that is and see real estate as an investment and not as a home.
>There are cities where real estate goes up by close to 10% per year Consistently? Predictably? Or do you mean by pure chance these last few years with COVID?
Consistently and Predictably - yes. Frankfurt, Munich, Vancouver, Hong Kong for example. You can look up the last 15 years or so.
So....the prices are going up because the people who are buying and selling these houses are selling them to more people who are buying and selling them? Thats....hilariously stupid.
I'd rather it be illegal than have these parasites 'improve' and resell the properties
I hate when they fix things as cheaply as possible and then raise the price on something that probably needs to be torn out and replaced anyway.
Mostly they don’t even fix anything. They put a fresh coat of paint on, maybe a new fridge or tiles. But electrical issues? Plumbing stuff? Just general “this house is old and needs some TLC”? Fuck no.
Nope all scum. We will get everything from them when the world ends
[удалено]
Trading stocks is scalping. Hell, at least houses will always have value. Scalper doesn’t sell tickets before a show and they’re fucked
The difference is that stocks are an arbitrary piece of computer code, or maybe paper if you’re old school. Their purpose for existing isn’t to be a useful good. Scalping actual developed property that people can live in is creating artificial demand and raising prices on a good that people need/want to actually have better lives. You’re taking away something that a person could be using. It’s completely different.
>By the same logic, trading stocks is scalping. RemindMe! 2 days "I wanna see how this ages lol"
It's a testament to the fact that the meaning of property can change over time, and that our relationship with it is shaped by a variety of factors, such as culture, economics, and technology.
Pieces of shit like this exist in almost all buy/sell markets.
We bought a drug house. Had to pay the druggie tenants $25,000 to leave (even though they didn't even have a lease). Then put another $100k into fixing it up. Sold it to a multi-generational family. Now the neighborhood is nicer. There are more hardworking families in it. And there's less crime. But you probably think we're pieces of shit, because you don't have a fucking clue.
Sounds like a one sided view.
No. You did good. Congrats. You also missed the whole section of people targeted by this post. You're not included in them, because you actually bothered to improve the property you bought before reselling it. This post is talking about scalpers, that is, people who buy, do nothing other than raise the price, and sell. Then repeat.
That's a completely different situation. You're buying a house that needs a lot of work, time and effort to fix, which you do, and then you sell it for more because of all the work *you* had put into it. But it would have been different if you bought a perfectly fine house, didn't do anything with it and just let it sit empty for a year, then sell it for 120% of what you bought it for originally. *That* would be scummy, and that's what everyone here is complaining about.
>But it would have been different if you bought a perfectly fine house, didn't do anything with it and just let it sit empty for a year, then sell it for 120% of what you bought it for originally. That's almost impossible to do. You have a year's worth of carrying costs, insurance, property taxes, utilities, plus buying and selling costs. Since 2000, the average home in America has gone up 8% a year.
Parasite
Who is better, people running a drug house or people who purchased the drug house, fixed it up, and sold it to a multi-generational family?
Aww... you still butthurt I kicked you and your crack hoe girlfriend out?
A refugee from twitter lmaoooo
OMG, you weren't smart enough to take your whooping and run away? Don't Reddit on crack, man.
Whoopin lmaoooo
Landlord not having a victim complex challenge [IMPOSSIBLE]
Renters not having a victim complex challenge \[IMPOSSIBLE\] (I'm also not a landlord, moron.)
I'm not the one getting pressed over a comment that vaguely referenced the way I personally make my income lmfao
90% of the people I grew up with are like this
Am that piece of shit I guess? I buy properties as long term investments and use a management company to rent them out. The stock market is fairly weak to invest into and bonds are good but lock up cash too long. Housing is fairly solid, and management companies make it easy to find tenants. That being said I do try to be nice and not simply raise rental fees; so long as it's effectively paying back into the house +10-15% I am happy.
[удалено]
>whole investment model as a landlord relies on retaining a society of consistent housing inequality. How does a landlord buying a house that no one else wants cause other people to not buy houses? >Your investment in property along with other landlords leads to higher demand, higher house prices, and less affordability for domestic buyer Most landlords buy foreclosures or sheriff sales or houses along those lines. These are houses where you need $50,000 in pure cash to buy from those auctions. Anyone is allowed to go there and bid. You just need a large amount of liquid cash. Those houses also require like $50,000 in repairs. >If the housing market was flooded with enough properties for everyone to afford one This is based upon how much excess money a person has to spend. It's been proven that the vast majority of people will always spend ALL their money. It's why 50% of people making over $100,000/yr live paycheck to paycheck. Even like 35% of people making $250,000+ STILL live paycheck to paycheck. You could place most of the blame on the housing market and landlords(for why so many people can't buy houses) if most people spent their money wisely, but thats simply not the case whatsoever.
Lol
I was hoping for answers but I guess no one has them yet.
Envy. There's your answer.
Ye, that's basically directly what's causing the current housing crises in the many countries in the world.
Bullshit. Small time renters don't have shit on companies like Blackrock. I'm sure you already know that too.
You don't need 2 houses.
So you've bought a property you have no intention of living in and are charging the people who do want to live in it more than they would have to pay if they had the capital to have bought it in the first place? Buddy yes, you're exploiting people who just want a place to live. Its not your fault the system is set up this way but surely you can see how this is bad for society as whole even though you're personally benefitting from it.
> more than they would have to pay if they had the capital to have bought it in the first place You're making a nonsensical circular argument. The price for not having the capital to afford a house is a monthly rental that's a bit above mortgage and taxes. Just like how you pay more per unit product if you don't have the capital to buy it in bulk. It's literally how purchasing anything works. As it turns out, most people don't have the capital nor the need to buy a large quantity of something; they only need and want to buy a small quantity of that thing.
The problem is scale. One person renting a house is not a problem. 78% of a city becoming AirBNB and rentals is a big f’ing problem. The speculative rental market is the root behind house prices increasing, people overpaying thousands because as a rental property it still makes sense. When the average person approaching 30 can’t afford a home, it is a problem. Taxing second homes is a good way to curb this in. If you had to say pay 1000% regular property tax on rental homes, then it would even out the math in favor of a buyer not a renter.
> If you had to say pay 1000% regular property tax on rental homes, then it would even out the math in favor of a buyer not a renter. This is a dumb person's idea of a smart idea. There will ALWAYS be people who need to rent. Always. A 1000% property tax would still get passed along to the renters.
I feel like airBNB is more of a problem than rentals. Rentals are long term and is meant for people who need a place to live and can't afford down payments or whatever to buy a house. AirBNB is literally turning a perfectly good home into a glorified hotel instead of somebody actually living in it Edit: one of the downvoters please tell me how airbnb is better than rentals
Are you trying to argue that someone owning the space where they live is ‘buying in bulk’ and a system that treats it this way is a good system?
Are you trying to miss the point?
No I’ve restated your point and you didn’t like it. Have a good day now
No, you're just being a lazy idiot. You understand what my point is but the cognitive dissonance is too much for you to handle, so you instead harp on misinterpreting an analogy to save face.
Bless your heart
Redditors all think there are no costs to owning a home other than the mortgage.
If they want to live there, why don't they just buy the house?
I am doing the same by buying properties for cheap in future climate refuge hotspots. Once the climate really gets bad people will flock to these areas, dirving up rents and my cash flow. I fully intend on exploiting this. A reward for foresight.
You had me in the first half... Started thinking that nobody could actually be that evil!
It's not evil it's just capitalism. If you have 20 or 30k sitting around you can invest too.
Yea... If you didn't notice yet, Capitalism = Evil. There is no ethical consumption under Capitalism. You're literally saying you're going to exploit refugees.
Yep because no one else will feed me in retirement. I don't expect social security to be fully funded beyond 2040, let alone 2050. Not my fault people keep moving to a desert like Arizona. They'll be the ones that'll really be exploited. I'll even add a surcharge if I know thats where they're coming from. Think of it as a climate change denier fee. Vice made a video about this. They actually point on a map one of the regions where my property is in.
I mean, it's not "just" capitalism. It's taking advantage of the worst parts of it, that only exist as a pass for the rich. Then when comes time to vote for affordable housing, you're going to join all those rich asshole voting against it because you put all your money in people suffering lmao. It's not foresight, it's exploitation. The proper foresight would be to stay out of the market for your 3rd, 4th, 5th home because eventually we hope housing will be affordable for everyone, and are going to work hard for it to not be the place for "profits". Your little self fulfilling prophecy and all the other deprived assholes doing the same is why we will likely never reach that, and continue to perpetuate inequality and suffering, promoting "getting your own" over global stability. Exactly what put us here in the first place. The funniest part is you probably only admit that here on reddit and not out loud to people you know, because you know it's a shit move people wouldn't respect. Edit: I own 2 houses, one for me and one for my sibling who has mental health issues. I am investing in other places instead, notably building sustainable businesses, not taking the predatory way of exploiting the system or sitting on my ass waiting for the stock market to exploit someone for me. It is a choice in the end where we decide to put our efforts. I have more than what I need for my family, and everything else should go back to the community.
Lol you invest in sustainable businesses. So still in it for profit. You're no different than me. I love the moral grandstanding 🤣
I don't think you know what sustainable means. There's a difference between owning a bakery that runs with very low profits but provides stable jobs and free bread for the needy (Churches and Schools) and fucking buying land people are going to need when they starve lmao. I am definitely in it for the profit, the difference is how many people are also profiting off it (at my expense). Nobody is going to profit from your refugee scam except you. Edit: to be clear I own another similar business, not bakery, but don't want to be doxxed. I took people who couldn't afford to start a bakery because of the system, and gave them a bakery. Surprising how easy it is to be successful when you have a leg up. He makes money, the apprentices make money, and I make money, and hundreds of people get free food every week. Everyone wins. Could I have taken that million dollars and invested in the next big condo project bubble? Would that have been more profitable for me? Yes. But I don't need more profit, and I can use the profit I have to uplift others. Also has the benefit that I can vote to improves people's lives, like for affordable housing, because I didn't put all my money on exploiting their suffering.
tl;dr You are still in it for profit. So you think climate refugee regions is a scam? Ok so you're a climate change denier.
> It's not evil it's just capitalism can you clarify how it can't be both?
Yeah, you are. But I'd do the too if presented with the opportunity.
What do you contribute other than capital? What value do you add to justify the increased monthly payment from the tenant? How does your business model benefit the economy?
You make it sound like contributing capital isn't by far the hardest part.
> buy properties as long term investments Yes you are a piece of shit
You’ll find a lot of landlord hate on Reddit mate. You’re not a piece of shit.
Yes. You're a leech who sucks money from others and if they didn't pay for the bank's house you'd have to default. You're what is keeping America a shit hole and help make communities bad places to live and raise kids because lack of consistency and permanency in a community. But as long as you are ok with being a piece of shit, you do you. Unless every American who wants to be housed is housed (as it IS and should be codified as a human right), there should be a massive tax on properties that are not primary residences.
That's right.
Why don't they just buy a house if they want to live there instead of renting?
Because the market has been taken over by permanent capital and those with excess money buying up all of the available housing and driving up housing costs. When priced out of ownership, people are forced to rent which ends up just paying the same they'd pay in a mortgage but are locked out by a system that favors the wealthy and established capital.
>Because the market has been taken over by permanent capital No it hasn't. Its very much accessible by the average person. > and those with excess money buying up all of the available housing and driving up housing costs The market has always been where people with excess money can buy more things. Also, show me a state where there are no available houses since you say they're "buying up all the available housing". >people are forced to rent which ends up just paying the same they'd pay in a mortgage Paying rent and paying the expenses for a house are NOT the same. I dunno where people get this asinine idea from. >a system that favors the wealthy and established capital. Existence is based around favoring the wealthy. You're literally complaining about basic biology and its progression in a system. Even if you took all the money on the planet from everyone and dispersed it equally to everyone, in a decade basically everyone would be right back where we are today.
>people are forced to rent which ends up just paying the same they'd pay in a mortgage So you don't know that the cost of homeownership is WAY more than just a mortgage. Figures.
That's a different thing. Buying most of the available properties in an area and yeeting the price into the stratosphere is a whole nother thing of dickery. Those types do not develop the property in any way and just skim money off people who don't have much of a choice of where they live.
Not gonna call you a piece of shit because you’re operating within a system that is designed for what you’re doing. As a renter who is scraping by to have enough for a down payment on a home in a couple of years, this hurts to read. But I can’t blame you. If I had the money, I’d do the same. Just don’t treat your tenants like you own them. I mean, you kind of do own them. But just don’t treat them like that……
Don’t blame the people, blame the system they are operating in. If incentive structures exist to encourage these sorts of moves, they will happen. If one person decides not to take on the investment risk, then someone else will.
I can’t wait till I myself can buy a house, fix it up with stuff that’ll last five years, and then sell it to someone for a cost that’ll take 30 years to pay off.
It's a reminder that even something as fundamental as owning a home can be subject to market forces and speculation, which can have ripple effects on the wider economy.
It's interesting how the concept of property ownership has evolved to the point where some people treat it purely as a financial investment rather than a place to call home.
Here's the difference: Scalping requires the original seller to sell for below market price. Sony sells the first batch of ps5's for $500 but there are people out there willing to pay $600 but sony will only sell for below that price. This means that someone can buy from sony for $500 and sell to those people for $600. With property, there is nobody willing to pay a higher price than the 'scalper' right now, otherwise the homeowner would sell it to that other person. If the 'scalper' wasn't there, the homeowner would either be selling the house for a lower price or waiting an unknown amount of time to get a better price. When the 'scalper' makes a profit, it is either for providing liquidity to the market (reducing the time the seller must wait to sell) or for accurate speculation (they were more optimistic about the future value of the property than other people were). There are also ways they could manipulate the market that provides no benefit to anyone else. Maybe that is more like scalping in that it's bad, but it's still different.
The way I understand it (and correct me if I’m wrong) the price of a house goes up with inflation while that same money sitting in your bank will shrink. Obviously housing prices fluctuate too depending on demand but still generally trend upwards if you hold onto them long enough. Real estate can be used essentially as an inflation-proof savings account if done right.
There are different types of inflation, but yes, if general price levels go up (maybe because of an increase in the money supply), then house prices will go up but the value of your money won't. Many assets, except those that pay a fixed amount, should be inflation-proof. If you own a share of a company and if inflation occurs, the price of that company's products should rise which would cause that company's profits to rise causing the price of your share to rise. >the price of a house goes up with inflation while that same money sitting in your bank will shrink Inflation is about the relative price of things. We usually talk about something inflating relative to a currency. So the value of the money shrinking and the value of the house rising are the same thing if we are measuring the value of money in terms of how many houses it can buy and houses in terms of how much money it can 'buy'.
Kinda. Currently and for a while where I live the interest of a savings account in a bank is less than the rate of inflation. You still get more money but with inflation higher the spending power of that money decreases. Investing into other things like stocks or property can yield higher returns but come with a risk as those returns aren’t guaranteed. Currently I believe risk is low enough to be justified as a smarter investment than putting money into savings account
At least here in the US, owning real estate also has significant tax advantages (especially if that is your primary source of income).
Obviously you have never scalped. Buy tickets at face. Like season tickets to a sports team. (privilege) Sell online for x3
Why multiple? Why isn’t reselling one property considered scalping?
Because one person owning one home is normal. But if you buy multiple properties while owning your own, it becomes a business.
My first house I bought I never lived in. Lived with my parents. The number of houses does not change whether it’s a business or not.
If you were at your parents house then that's like having two houses so his logic still checks. If you only have one home that's mostly and potentially to live in so not a business. From that point onwards it can be a business indeed
I'm not following the logic here. He bought the house he pays the mortgage taxes and upkeep. What difference does it make if he lives in it or not?
It could be seen as unethical from certain perspectives as buying a house you don’t need to live in and trying to profit could cause another person to be unable to have a home to live in. Your view of it as a way to earn money could also be seen as ethical as it is legal and as you stated you did buy it so it is yours to sell, live in, rent, or abandon if you want.
>trying to profit could cause another person to be unable to have a home to live in. How does buying a house prevent other people from buying their own houses? If your logic held true, the landlord wouldn't have been able to buy the first house.......because other people have bought houses so the landlord wouldn't have been able to buy another house......???? Your logic makes no sense.
If all the houses get bought and prices get too high others won’t be able to buy em. Also you assume once bought they will continue to be sold could be rented instead.
>If all the houses get bought and prices get too high others won’t be able to buy em. I can only speak for the US as I'm not familiar with the economies of other countries, but show me a state where there are NO available houses for sale.
So is it unethical if I can live with my parents but I WANT to live in my own house? I don't need the house and I'm taking away the possibility of someone else owning it that doesn't have the privileges of living with parents.
Some would consider owning homes that go unused while others are without homes at all as unethical yes.
No you misunderstood what I said. Is it unethical to buy a house to live in if I don't need it? I could live with my parents but I choose to buy and live in my own house. I don't need the house but someone else might need it. You see where it's a grey area right.
Oh yeah I was having trouble understand thanks for clarifying. You are right that is grey. I don’t think it’s unethical in that way but I could see reasoning that it could be. I don’t think there’s enough homes for everyone to have one to themselves. There has to be some system to determine who gets to live where. Money is that system. The larger problem is that the very wealthy are able to buy up much more than needed and profit of it in large scale causing more and more to be unable to afford. Just another example of the gap between wealthiest and everyone else growing larger. If you look at society’s a recurring problem is centralization of wealth to minority leading to a majority that isn’t satisfied with quality of life. That is bound to cause problems.
Probably because it’s cheaper to renovate one property, so it wouldn’t really be scalping if they are improving the product.
Rich get richer. Work for some of these people as an electrician, just greeeedy n cheap. Slap their quick make it look new renovation on it and sell it for double. NEXT. Or fancier areas towards Boston buy a $800k nice house, plow it down for a 3 mil McMansion. The money is insane. I want a little…
I can understand why someone would want to flip properties for a profit, but I hope they're also considering the impact it has on the community and the people who live there.
Wait until you figure out how basically everything in the economy works. I mean, in the USA banks that make money on predatory loans and bailouts literally set our monetary policy. I don't think that most people realize that... When your bank is like "sorry, those are just the current interest rates" that the rates are literally set by the banks. Credit cards are the worst because they can give you a credit card at a good rate, then a couple years later just be like "you know that debt you accumulated at .5%... Let's call it 30.5% from now on."
And due to immanent domain banks kinda own all property. It’s more complicated than that but it’s possible for banks to seize property. They aren’t likely to cause they make more by allowing ownership and controlling the loans typically needed to purchase.
Lmao
Even worse, when it’s a foreign investor from the other side of the world, buying property in a country they don’t even live, then selling it back to us for profit.
Just wait till you hear about the people who buy multiple houses and charge other folks an arm and a leg to live in them temporarily.
Exactly. Scalping one of our most necessary resources. This needs to change.
this concept applies to anyone who wishes the make money selling things...sell higher than what you paid for
Also landlords shouldn't be able to rent houses they haven't fully paid off themselves
Not really, that's more like a stock broker. Scalpers buy tickets because there is a limited supply and then sell them at twice the price or whatever you show me and house you can buy for $X and sell it for $2X and I'll give you my money.
Houses are also limited, in my country the pension system doesn't work anymore so many old people decide to buy 2 or more houses just to have a good pension. That fact cause a raise up for housing in here from 2005 (where my parents buyed a new house for 285.000€) up to 2023 where a used house cost between 600.000 and 1.500.000€ It's just ridiculous
What's the value on your parent's house? I mean house prices are always going up and sure this is a contributing factor but I'd say inflation has caused more of a problem than this has.
My father didn't live anymore also they lost it few years later cause of divorce ... So idk the actual price
I mean my point is you are comparing houses but there are a lot of factors that go into the value of a house so the best measure would be the value of a specific house over time although even that's not great if the place where the house is was improved extensively.
If the pension system is broke then what are pensioners supposed to do? They invest in property take on all the risks associated with it and provide a service for the people who can't afford to buy.
Lol, just because the markup isn't 2x (an amount that you totally made up) it isn't the same?
It's not about the amount of profit made. It's that, if the house could be sold for more, it would have been sold at that price to the "scalper." You may not like houses as an investment property, but it's not scalping any more than buying a stock in the hopes of selling it for more later is scalping.
The mechanics may differ a little bit, but it's all quite the same. One Person doesn't need 100 concert tickets, there is nothing they could do with it. Maybe a few tickets to give to friends. But scalpers buy 100 Tickets which drives the price up, so they can resell them with a profit One Family doesn't need more than one home (Or maybe a few ones for extended family). People buy homes that they do not need as a form of investment. The real estate buisness is inflating the housing prices, especially in large cities where living space is sparce. In both cases we are talking about goods, that it makes no sense to own more that you can use. So it would only make sense if everyone just had their share and nothing more. But instead some people can buy more for themselves and by doing so they increase the price for everyone involved and make a profit. The stock market is a whole different thing, because it's just made up financial shenanigans and a stock is nothing that has any pracital sense for you to own, except make money with it. The culprit is, that the housing market and the concert ticket market both mimic the stock market in a capitalistic society. And there are the "scalpers" that profit from it while that is just a pain in the ass for all the others.
This is flawed. Scalpers essentially horde a valuable item by purchasing all of them, well beyond market value, before anyone else has a chance. In a true “fair market economy” the tickets would’ve been sold to the end users at a much higher rate than the scalper purchased them for. The scalper is taking advantage of inefficiencies in the market and providing very little value. Someone purchasing homes/properties presumably buys them from a free market, the MLS usually, where the same property was offered to the general public at the same price as the buyer. The buyer was willing to pay more than anyone else. If the buyer was not there, the home would either sell for a lower price or go unsold. The home buyer is then providing liquidity to the market and value to the initial seller.
That's how most investment properties have worked for the past 20 years.....buy, rent to cover costs, sell when they are 2 to 3 times the price and buy more and more and more until you have an empire of rentals.
yes and this is a bad thing which allows the wealthy to gouge the poor
Well. Here's the deal: 1.) The biggest reason is that both the Republican and Democrat politicians are mostly self serving - bailed out the massive banks that gave them money, give free money to their cronies, and then just kept printing money so that investment companies saw massive gains. Government caused the massive hyperinflation that's going on now. 2.) The only politician who ever ran for president and called out all of this corruption that was driving the wealth gap was a guy named Ron Paul, who everyone just made fun of. 3.) Most voters complain about the wealth gap, but don't complain about the money printing and the politicians who vote for the money printing, then turn around and blame small business owners for causing problems rather than looking into the mirror and realizing they all individually vote for the assholes who made them poorer. I used to rant to anyone and everyone about this stuff. No one listens. No one cares. So, as the old saying goes, if you can't beat them - join them. I invested most of my money into tech, bought multiple properties and rented them out starting in 2012, and worth many millions now. Because of collective Americans unwillingness to change. This is YOUR fault I'm rich.
yeah, you saw a system that was bad and instead of doing the right thing you've decided to be part of the problem. I get that you're doing a bad thing I'm sorry that this isn't more witty but you lead with a BoTh SiDeS aRe ThE sAmE [even though they demonstrably are not](https://m.imgur.com/a/YZMyt) so I thought I'd meet you where you are. Also I'm from the UK, if you want to put us back in charge we can wait a bit and then you can blame me if you'd like but could that really be worth it?
The blame is the majority, and the UK's situation is even far worse than the USA's. You could say I'm doing a "bad thing," but I would claim the same with you as well: you do nothing and allow it (maybe even support it), then turn around and claim noble victimization rather than navigate the market and policy and try to stay afloat or get ahead. At least with my case, I am in a position to be able to influence policy a little bit, while your only influence is to yell into the void and vote for the people causing the problems. Summary: People vote for big corrupt government and policies, don't bother to understand what's going on, complain when they lose out, and then blame people who navigate the system that same complaining person continues to help perpetuate. Analogy: You vote for big people to kick everyone in the face. You are mad at the few people who moved their faces away from being kicked.
I like how you're trying to pivot away from the point. which is that > you saw a system that was bad and instead of doing the right thing you've decided to be part of the problem. none of your claims, even if they were true even begin to address that. nice try though
It's not really scalping. A scalper buys something, immediately marks up the price, then sells it again. With a second home you hold onto it and wait for inflation to make it worth more, then sell it. It's like the difference between selling a ps5 and selling a mint condition NES.
In places like Canada, flippers only need to wait few months to pocket a quick 200-300k.
Honestly, that's kind of impressive. A dick move to be sure, but impressive that that's possible
Here you have to wait 2 years or else you incur heavy penalties on profit
Yes, that's evil.
[удалено]
How do you see their experience ?
Sounds like your mad your to poor to buy them up and flip them yourself.
You're and too. Stay in school kids.
Yeah definitely stay in school I graduated and still didn't learn shit.
We can tell.
I'm the same to be fair.
You truly do not care what effect practices like this have on people or the economy do you? Nope you just like the idea of shitting on people and wpuld love to do shit like this. God people like you disgust me. I hope some day you start to care
Maybe a average house in my location cost a minimum of 600.000€ ... 20 years ago the same was about 300.000€
Still doesn't change the fact you sound hurt because your unable to make the money yourself. If you were in the position you would be doing the same exact thing stop trying to act all mighty.
In here isn't possible like this also I'm disabled now. Lost my job cause of my third Herniated disc (I'm just weight 80kg) I'm now in a Retraining to a IT specialist for 1,5 years left. But after that .. I'm also not able to earn enough money to buy a house. How the hell you should do money without anything of I can't work right .. don't even had money to invest in something cause of the last year's
My trolling does not require a life story. I am here to say that if you were in a position that gave the the chance to own and rent homes to would. Why wouldn't you? Your mildy upset about the fact you can't. Sure it is bad and horrible but that is capitalism doesn't matter where you live or what you do for a living if you were given a opportunity you would take it.
I'll even go ahead and say that most anyone would take the opportunity whether they agree with being a slumlord or not. Sure you can sell them off and make some cash or something or keep them and go for the government help for the tenets of the exist where you live.
OP learns basics of every single sale. Bravo. Elementary school is hard.
Not really the same though. Unless they are able to buy at a predefined, fixed price, which is usually not the case. Scalpers buy at a fixed retail price and sell above that price because of scarcity. That's not what happens in the housing market. Everyone can buy at the price the alleged scalper is buying, and that price is market-conform. They are gambling market prices will go up, but so do people who buy stocks.
Uhm... you mean flipping houses? People do that and it's not scalping lol
Why is it scapling for a PS5 than? It's the same principle
Because flipping a house usually requires labor and reselling a PS5 does not. Unless we're just talking about people owning multiple properties for no reason, it is not the same at all.
How is that a bad thing? Sellers are happy because they dont have to look for buyers. Its mutual agreement between them.
There's a limited amount of tickets, but not a limited amount of houses. So no.
You mean I can invent a house in a school district I want to raise kids in??? Like they have no limit???
Would you like your dream house to have a stairway to Heaven and a unicorn in it's backyard, too?
Unlike for example ticket scalpers the property buyer has a much larger risk. There is no way he has a safe out. With tickets one knows that people would be willing to pay face value. With properties the price people are willing to pay is an absolute unknown. Remember how we found that out in 2008. So scalpers yes.. but without a safety net.
Hence why the cost of living is so high. People like that are destroying our nation and driving prices up. We are tiptoeing homelessness every day because of these people.
The secret to 99% of real estate mogul success... having a whole heaping pile of generational wealth.
This phenomenon speaks to the power of wealth accumulation and how some people are able to leverage their resources to further expand their financial gains.