• hark@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      People/people made worse by the system. The system that created the landlord/tenant roles.

    • mob
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      deleted by creator

      • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Different is not necessarily oppositional.

        My doctor does not benefit from me being sick. My tutor does not benefit from me flanking.

        My landlord does benefit from me living paycheck to paycheck because they have extracted the maximum possible cash from me.

        • mob
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          deleted by creator

          • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            1 year ago

            Look at Kaiser; they run a vertically integrated shop. They’re fanatical about

            • not paying for any elective treatments even if it would improve quality of

            • preventive care to cover all the diseases they’re legally required to cover

            • minimizing org-to-org friction

            • using the cheapest means of communication whenever possible (text > video >> in-person)

            I never had my blood pressure and lab work more scrutinized, never had more help offered to lose weight, etc, than when I was a KP patient.

            Turns out I have special medical needs and there is a specialist clinic near me, so I switched insurance. But I always felt that my doctor wanted to keep my ass out of the hospital because that is where his bonus came from.

            Now SURGEONS, that’s a different story.

            • mob
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              deleted by creator

        • KirbyProton@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Wait, what? How does it benefit your landlord if you live paycheck to paycheck?

          They want the most they can get, of course. I just don’t quite understand what you mean?

          • clanginator@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            You living paycheck to paycheck doesn’t affect your landlord unless you miss a payment. And in those instances landlords don’t have any kind of human empathy for the situation their tenant is in.

            • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              It does affect your landlord. Lower income means higher risk of non-payment.

              That’s why some places require credit checks. The ideal tenant is rich and willing to pay whatever.

              • aesthelete@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                The ideal tenant is rich and willing to pay whatever.

                The ideal tenant is rich enough to pay increasing rent in perpetuity, undemanding enough to not demand costly repairs, and too poor to buy their own housing unit.

              • clanginator@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Okay I’m not sure if you just have zero reading comprehension, or if you’re just being intentionally obtuse, so let me restate.

                Again, you living paycheck to paycheck DOES NOT affect your landlord, UNLESS you miss a payment. I’m not sure how you could possibly say otherwise when you presented zero actual argument for why this statement is untrue.

                MANY MANY people are excellent renters, never miss a payment, and live paycheck to paycheck.

                If you live paycheck to paycheck and pay rent every month, it makes no difference to your landlord. $2k/mo in their pocket is $2k/mo in their pocket, no matter how much u have in the bank after paying it.

                The ideal tenant is rich and willing to pay whatever.

                Yes, that is true. That is an ideal tenant. That has nothing to do with whether someone living paycheck to paycheck affects their landlord.

                That’s why some places require credit checks.

                Yeah no shit landlords use credit checks to see if ur a high risk of non-payment. That’s called credit history. Has nothing to do with whether ur living paycheck to paycheck. I know ppl who live paycheck to paycheck with ~800 credit scores.

                What ur describing is credit scores, not whether or not someone lives paycheck to paycheck. Try again.

      • aesthelete@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        “Not saying your tutor is a bad person, but they have interests that oppose your own”

        Not really.

        “Not saying your doctor is a bad person, but they have interests that oppose your own”

        Not really.

        You could say that if they were ruthlessly in pursuit of money above all other interests, maybe, and then only if they were short-sighted enough to think that keeping you stupid or sick was the best way to make the most money.

        Doctors have other goals and are paid salary. Tutors are often working temporarily and part time. I don’t think either of these groups actually oppose your interests.

        A landlord, on the other hand, directly opposes tenant interests in multiple ways. Every dollar they spend on repairs is a dollar less profit. Every dollar of rent increase they can get you to pay is a dollar more in their pocket. Every competing housing development being built threatens the value of their asset as well as the future profitability of their current housing stock due to the competition.

        Of course there are “good” landlords that don’t maximize their own interests just like there are shitty doctors (mostly holistic, to be fair) out there that want to milk you dry and never cure anything. But that doesn’t change the calculus much. They’re just the exceptions that prove the rule.

        • mob
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          deleted by creator

          • aesthelete@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You can do the same justifications for landlords that you did for tutors and doctors though.

            Kind of, maybe, if a high percentage of landlords was in it to “provide housing”…which I didn’t see any evidence of in my decade and a half of renting.

            I’m also a bit of a weirdo too. So, I had a lot more opportunity to see any of that. I probably moved over 10 times in my ~15 years renting because I couldn’t stand the yearly rent increases they were trying to force on me and was stupid/stubborn enough (and well off enough) to vote with my feet.