Exegesis - Cap/Com-ist

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian
The way I read it, Vel put down 15% of the value of these houses, borrowed the rest from the bank, and then spent his labor (and more money) fixing them up. He now receives rent a useage fee from those who live there. I see no exploitation.

What if you got your rent doubled for no other reason than market prices going up? Would you think that was exploitation?

[chequita guevara]

Geez you bastards are prolific.

[Kidlicious]

Last week was dead week for me. This week is finals though.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Kidicious

What if you got your rent doubled for no other reason than market prices going up? Would you think that was exploitation?

It would suck, that's for sure. A sudden doubling in rent sounds, on its face, fishy to me. Rising costs are one thing, but just *bang* double... it strains credulity that costs for the landlord would have gone up so much in a short time period (thus, commercial long-term leases are exempt from this example, but I figure we're not talking about commercial rent anyway).

I'm honestly not that well acquainted with the real estate situation in California, beyond that it's insanely expensive across the board.

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian


It would suck, that's for sure. A sudden doubling in rent sounds, on its face, fishy to me. Rising costs are one thing, but just *bang* double... it strains credulity that costs for the landlord would have gone up so much in a short time period (thus, commercial long-term leases are exempt from this example, but I figure we're not talking about commercial rent anyway).

I'm honestly not that well acquainted with the real estate situation in California, beyond that it's insanely expensive across the board.

-Arrian

So are saying that a landlord is only justified in charging rent to recover his costs?

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious


I call bull****. You don't own three houses by working even if you are a doctor. You aren't telling us something.

And why not?? I only own 1 but I could easily own 2 or 3 but they would be mortgaged and with the renters providing an income to cover the mortgage. I actually have not done this because I wasn't willing to take the risk of such an investment and also because I didn't have the time to perform the necessary LABOR. I can make more money I figure by working more at my job.

I haven't done it but I know many people that do do this even with only moderate incomes.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Kidicious


So are saying that a landlord is only justified in charging rent to recover his costs?

No, I think he's also entitled to some profit because of the risk he is assuming.

But, since I'm not a L-F capitalist type, I also don't like the idea of landlords gouging people by suddenly doubling their rent.

It's one thing if your rent is going up steadily ever year. You can plan ahead, and maybe that plan will involve moving. You've got time to react.

But if you're paying $500 now, and the next lease agreement arrives and says it's going up to $1000 - and you either have to agree (within a short period of time, IIRC) or move out... you're in a tough spot.

It is my understanding that there is some basic regulation of landlords for that reason...

Somehow I doubt Vel is pulling that crap (especially since if he tried it in SC, it wouldn't work ).

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian


No, I think he's also entitled to some profit because of the risk he is assuming.

Ok. You also think that he should be compensated for risk of loss. Is that every compensation that you believe that a capitalist should be compensated for?

[Arrian]

I think people deserve compensation for:

- labor (to me, this includes thinking/managing, not just manual labor)
- assumption of risk
- ingenuity/invention

I think that about covers it...

-Arrian

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Arrian
I think people deserve compensation for:

- labor (to me, this includes thinking/managing, not just manual labor)
- assumption of risk
- ingenuity/invention

I think that about covers it...

-Arrian

How about for an increase of value in something they purchased using cash gained through labor or innovation? Or is that part of the assumption if risk element

[Arrian]

Like fixing up the house Vel bought?

Vel put labor into it, coupled with capital (he had to pay for the supplies). I'd say that's part labor, part risk (more money into the investment). If innovation was involved, that figures in as well, although I was thinking more along the lines of inventing a new product (in which case Vel might REALLY become a pigdog oppressor).

-Arrian

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Kidicious
No. Capital applied to labor sucks the value out of labor. The more capital there is in the economy the more that capital demands of labor. Eventually you come to a point where capital sucks the productive powers from labor. For example, people die, or wars are started etc, so that capitalists can continue to get returns on their capital. If they don't get returns their ficticious, speculative capital will vanish in a massive panick that will free labor.

I have Y labor which creates X value. I have Z capital, which I apply to Y. Y now produces k*X value, where k > 1.

[Flubber]

Kid

There are places with actual surplus houses.

Take rural Newfoundland as an example. There are isolated communities where every time a family leaves or a preson living alone passes away, there is another empty house.

If a family wants to vacation there for a few months or a novellist wanted to go there for inspiration, shouldn't they be allowed to RENT. People are unlikely to want to buy since there is no guarantee that they could EVER resell


More generally Kid you miss out on some basic things

1. There are people who prefer to rent for any number of reasons even if they could afford to buy.

2. Whether a home is owner-occupied or rented is irrelevant to the issue of scarcity of homes in an area. In California I don't see home prices abating at all even if there was no "speculative ownership" .. . you still have the exact same number of people wanting a place to live

[GePap]

My uncle, who was one of 7 children who grew up in the house his mothers family had built for themselves became a doctor, and ow he has 4 properties, One huge 8 room house, a beach house, a house in the hills, an apartment in the City, none of which he rents.

Anyways, what does renting a property have to do with capitalism?

Capitalism =/ free markets, or even markets. Its a much more complicated relation, and of course, making money a commodity in itself. A Landlord is not a capitalist, since a feudal lord or a Mercantalist might as well be a landlord.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian
Like fixing up the house Vel bought?

Vel put labor into it, coupled with capital (he had to pay for the supplies). I'd say that's part labor, part risk (more money into the investment). If innovation was involved, that figures in as well, although I was thinking more along the lines of inventing a new product (in which case Vel might REALLY become a pigdog oppressor).

-Arrian

Ok. Thank you for answering. Now next question is "Do you think that is all that capitalists recieve; comensation for their costs(including risk)?"