I feel violated

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flubber


There are thousands of communities in your nation and hundreds in your state. LOts of options.

I GET that some cities are "too expensive" but people still buy and rent in those places-- If they did not, prices/rents would go down.

If you can't change your rent, look at changing your income. In most of the high- rent cities there are lots of jobs or extra ways to make money

Why should we have to pay someone to live in a city? The question is essentially the same as the question, "why should we have to pay the govt so that we can earn money?"

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious


And if you don't want to pay as much tax then don't work as much. My point is that rent and tax have the same effect on people. We have to pay both and we can also do things so that we don't have to pay as much.

Well those generalities are also true of food, clothing and transportation.

If you don't see a difference in a state mandated legislatively enforced obligation and a contractual obligation which you can enter into with any one of thousands of parties . . . well

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flubber


They didn't have to . . thats the point-- Someone assessed things and felt that 500 K was a fair price for the house. Maybe they live in it for a few years and then choose to move elsewhere for whatever reason but want to retain the house.

THey will hope for a rent that can support the payments they are making but they will get "market" rent. If hosuing has gone down so be it

Maybe it's a property management company and they purchased the apartments to make a profit. Maybe they buy up a bunch of properties and can now manipulate the "market" rent.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Why should we have to pay someone to live in a city? The question is essentially the same as the question, "why should we have to pay the govt so that we can earn money?"

You don't have to pay to live in the city. You pay for the services and goods you need wherever you are. In some instances demand for scarce items means the price is higher-- you know that

AS for why we "pay the government"-- perhaps we shouldn't . . . . But most people agree that the government provides needed goods and service and are pretty compliant with the CONCEPT of paying taxes ( even if they quiblle as to the quantuum)

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flubber
If you don't see a difference in a state mandated legislatively enforced obligation and a contractual obligation which you can enter into with any one of thousands of parties . . . well

I've stated that it doesn't matter how many people I can sign a contract with when the rent is essentially the same. What do you say to that?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flubber


You don't have to pay to live in the city.

Bull****. It costs atleast $1500 a month to live in SF and probably only $500 to live in Witchita.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Maybe it's a property management company and they purchased the apartments to make a profit. Maybe they buy up a bunch of properties and can now manipulate the "market" rent.

Theoretically possible but if you see a company that is in anywhere near a dominant position with respect to residential properties in a major city, point that out.

I just don't see it happening in practice.

oh and of course the fact that a landlord wants to make profit offends me no more than the grocery store attempting to make a profit.

My question is what is your model-- If private interests don't create housing and then sell/rent it to the populace .. . where does it come from? Who pays to build it and who assigns who gets it and on what basis?

[DinoDoc]

No one cares that you have a crap job, Kid. Get a better one and stop boring us and invading threads that don't concern your crap job.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious


I've stated that it doesn't matter how many people I can sign a contract with when the rent is essentially the same. What do you say to that?

market price is market price. If a shovel is "worth" $10, do you expect to get it for $5

I fully expect that prices for similar properties in the same place would be very very similar

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
No one cares that you have a crap job, Kid. Get a better one and stop boring us and invading threads that don't concern your crap job.

[DinoDoc]

I mean really. I didn't ***** this much when I worked at Wal-Mart.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Bull****. It costs atleast $1500 a month to live in SF and probably only $500 to live in Witchita.

Right, and if you can make $3000/month in SF and $2000/month in Witchita, all other things being roughly equal one might consider moving to Witchita.

-Arrian

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Bull****. It costs atleast $1500 a month to live in SF and probably only $500 to live in Witchita.

Color me shocked!!! The market price of property varies according to demand !!


STOP THE PRESSES !!!!!

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Arrian


Right, and if you can make $3000/month in SF and $2000/month in Witchita, all other things being roughly equal one might consider moving to Witchita.

-Arrian

yup


OR people choose to live in cheaper suburbs and commute OR people choose to cohabitate with friends OR OR OR

Free choice-- its a wonderful thing!!!

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flubber


market price is market price. If a shovel is "worth" $10, do you expect to get it for $5

I fully expect that prices for similar properties in the same place would be very very similar

You aren't saying anything. What the price is the same with only one producer as it is with many producers? What the hell are you saying about taxes that is different from rent?!