• Yondoza@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    10 months ago

    How do you handle situations where people want to live temporarily in houses? An example would be a traveling nurse that doesn’t want to be in an apartment building.

    • Bocky@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      May people prefer to rent houses over owning one. Many of them I speak to tell me they want nothing to do with house maintenance and upkeep and they prefer to rent so that they don’t have to think or worry about any of the repairs. They like being able to just call the property manager when the hot water stops working or when their kiddo accidentally breaks a window.

      • BritishJ@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        When the kids breaks a window, they still have to pay. They just don’t have to source it, which means they might not be getting the best deal.

        Plus, most landlords leave things till the last minute or make it such hard work for the tenant to report it, they don’t bother.

        The maintenance is built into the rent, so they’re already paying for it, just not getting the best deal and losing the option to do it how they want.

        • Bocky@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Everything you are saying is true, and even with those facts noted, some people still prefer the convenience of renting and some like the carefree aspect of not having to be responsible for the upkeep.

      • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Well that’s all well and good until every house rental in your area starts requiring you to either do the maintenance anyway, or pay for it. So you get to pay for the house, and you get to maintenance the house, but you don’t get to own the house.

        I’ve watched things change in just the last 5 years where renting a house means you have to maintenance everything that isn’t structural, including lawn care, but you don’t own any stake in the house, and you can forget about putting up a shelf or a new coat of paint. And now that you’re paying the mortgage and taxes on this house, you’re paying for all the utilities for the house, and are fixing all the problems that occur with the house, the landlord gets to send people over whenever they want to that get to go inside your house and look around without you being home just to make sure you’re taking care of it the way they want you to. And then when you leave, either because you found a better deal, or the landlord just doesn’t feel like renting it to you anymore, you get the pleasure of walking away with nothing.

      • ysjet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        10 months ago

        Then buy a fucking maintenance contract, just like landlords do.

        • Bocky@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Why do you care so much how someone else chooses to live their life? Some people want to rent and it’s no one else’s business to make them do any different.

          If you want to own a house and a buy a maintenance contract go for it.

          I personally wouldn’t wish dealing with a home warranty company claim on my worst enemy. They are all scams geared to deny claims.

          • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            Maybe because corporate ownership of houses is taking over the market and driving people out of home ownership? Have you missed the news of the last many years? And because there is limited number of houses in reasonable distance (aka it’s not like selling widgets).

    • thedirtyknapkin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      10 months ago

      that’s significantly less bad of a problem than the current issue of no one being able to afford homes. that nurse might just have to go for the apartment… that’s really not that big of a deal.

      • Yondoza@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        I understand your sentiment, but it took all of a half second to think of one scenario that would cause problems in the proposed system.

        As frustrating as it is to hold off on a good-intentioned change, it is far more detrimental to charge headlong without considering the consequences. The systems that are in place now are there for a reason. Some of those reasons are greed and corruption, but others are because of they fulfill people’s needs. It would be stupid to build a new system to address the greed side without addressing the need side.

        • wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          But if you can’t summarize the solution to a complex societal problem with a history to it into a single simple sentence that can be used as a punchy “hot take”, clearly you just don’t want a solution! /s

          Way too many people in the world who are more willing to believe that things suck because everyone’s too stupid to try the “obvious” solution, instead of the fact that most societal issues are icebergs of complication and causes.