←back to thread

115 points harambae | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0.002s | source
Show context
danesparza ◴[] No.46209616[source]
Corporations shouldn't be allowed to own residential properties. Period.
replies(4): >>46209666 #>>46209900 #>>46210434 #>>46210670 #
malfist ◴[] No.46209666[source]
For every complex and difficult problem, there is a simple, easy and wrong solution.

If corporations can't own residential properties, how would anyone rent a house? How would home builders build model homes? How would Trusts manage real estate?

This is a complex and nuanced problem.

replies(3): >>46209864 #>>46209905 #>>46210108 #
ssl-3 ◴[] No.46209864[source]
From individuals?

Anecdotally: I've rented 5 different single-family houses in my life. All of them were rented from individuals.

Only 1 out of the 5 had a landlord that owned some other stuff that they also rented out.

For the remaining 4 out of 5, the landlord only had that singular property to rent: They lived wherever they lived, and they also had an extra house for whatever reason that they rented to me.

replies(3): >>46210127 #>>46210741 #>>46211067 #
1. malfist ◴[] No.46210127[source]
I'd be willing to bet the majority of those "individuals" were incorporated as an LLC to limit liability, thus making them corporations.
replies(1): >>46210613 #
2. ssl-3 ◴[] No.46210613[source]
I knew these individuals (no scare quotes required) personally before I rented from them.

But sure: If you want to bet that you're right about a very specific situation that you have no specific knowledge of, then don't let me stand in your way. A fool and his money are soon to part.

replies(1): >>46210833 #
3. BeetleB ◴[] No.46210833[source]
I think you're misreading his intent. It may not be the case for those you rented from, but over the last 15-20 years, the standard practice for them has increasingly become "Form an LLC".

In most cities, when you rent a detached house from a corporation, it's really one individual behind it.

These people are likely not the minority.

replies(1): >>46212791 #
4. ssl-3 ◴[] No.46212791{3}[source]
> those "individuals"

The context is my anecdotal experience.

Within that context, their intent was spelled very precisely.