Why is Rent still due during COVID-19?

328 Replies

Originally posted by @Cody L. :
Originally posted by @Dan Heuschele:
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
Originally posted by @David King:

Heather gets it, finally someone who gets it! As far as the tenant paying later, that's an absolute joke. The tenants wint pay a penny later. 

depending on asset class totally agree.. any lost rent is lost for good in the service work force housing sector.. white collar maybe not.

I seldom disagree with Jay, but I am confident that a mass majority of our C class tenants will make good on any rent they are short through this crisis.  How sure?  If I am wrong, I offer to take Jay to a steakhouse for dinner next time he is in San Diego.  Not a wager, I am not expecting anything from Jay if I am correct.  I have faith in our tenants.  We screen well and we build expectations.  

For missed rent payback: We were thinking one year payback time for up to 2 months missed, and 18 months if they are 3 months rent behind.  So it could be a while before I know if I am correct.

Related, I am expecting to receive a very large majority of our April LTR rents (probably none of the STR rents for most of March and all of April). I have communicated to the wife that I am predicting 85% of the total LTR rent. So far 2 tenants have contacted us about issues. They are both indicating that they will be paying the majority of their rent on time. We will know in about a week how accurate my 85% estimate is. We require just under 50% LTR rents to pay our rental mortgages but that includes the STR that will be getting virtually $0 rent.

 The problem I'd have is most of our tenants, if they get too far behind, won't want to pay extra to get caught up.  There is little downside to them just bailing on their balance and starting fresh somewhere else.  Lots of small owners don't check rental/credit history and will move them in for $200 or so.

Cody I totally agree with you on that sentiment.. I think i mentioned when i worked for the syndicator back in the 80s their Dallas properties they had a very hard time keeping full ( I know it was a different time) but a new prop would go up they would have move in special next thing you know they had a bunch of vacancies..  

 

Originally posted by @John Clark :
No confusion, Heather. Here's a cut and past from your original post:  "1 - Tenants should also have saved 'reserves' in place - so if they are already missing their rent payment come April just a few weeks into this, they are selectively deciding not to pay for their shelter in hopes of rent forgiveness - which is no different than shoplifting or any other use of a service with the knowing intention not to pay - no one to blame but one person"


You called them thieves -- shoplifting is theft. So quit evading and singing and dancing -- Do you agree that the Cheesecake Factory company is a den of thieves? Will you boycott it and encourage others to do so?

John Clark will you please just shut up and stop your childish argument with her? Nobody cares if you win or lose your petty argument about the cheesecake factory. We're here for perspective on how to handle this situation, not your bickering.

 

@Heather Frusco Perfect explanation! I truly believe if people just thought of others situation more than themselves, such as the property owner who still had a mortgage to pay and has built in reserves for this very reason! It is easier to make an excuse and always will be. Thanks for sharing your perspective on the topic.

I for one am very concerned about this pending RENT FORGIVENESS (not deferment, not abatement--totally FREE rent) legislation in New York State. It's terrifying:

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2019/s8125

Directly from the proposed Bill: 

Section 1(a) states: "Such residential tenant or small business commercial tenant shall not and shall never be required to pay any rent waived during such time period."

The above bill is very concerning to me. I have diligently paid off most of my mortgage debt and now rely solely upon rents from my very modest portfolio of properties. How can it be constitutional to force landlords to *forgive* rents for a period of several months? How is this equitable? Landlords are no different from grocers, gas stations, doctors, clothing stores, etc. We all provide basic human needs. Why would landlords be required to give their product away for free and not grocery stores, gas stations or other providers of essential products? in NYS landlords have already had to deal with the sweeping overhaul of the landlord/tenant laws. Now they want us to forgive rent? Mortgage relief means nothing in my particular situation--the vast majority of my expenses are property taxes, insurance, water, garbage, and maintenance. There is no forgiveness for those expenses! How can we agree to provide free housing without a dollar-for-dollar reduction of these non-mortgage expenses?



"We're here for perspective on how to handle this situation, not your bickering."

-------------------------------------------------------

As for handling the situation, everyone will have to come to their own conclusions Tim. I can give you a hint though, selectively and arbitrarily labeling tenants as thieves isn't handling the situation.



@Heather Frusco Hi Heather. Here are my thoughts relating to your post. I agree that rent is still due. Period. But although I have a mortgage to cover, I also have to face the reality that there MAY be some challenges for SOME tenants to pay rent at this time. The entire world didn’t stop working but many have been laid off so it’s a very real reality for all LL’s. I don’t know what’s going to happen or what I’m going to be faced with come April. What I do know is that I’ve never had an issue with my tenants. They’re hardworking and have never missed a rent payment. Whatever it looks like, I’m choosing to be a landlord of compassion. So many other landlords won’t agree. They’ll think it’s stupid. They’ll say I don’t know how to run a business. That I will fail. They’ll have a lot of opinions that are of absolutely no value to me. To each is own. But here’s what I think about your list:

1. To say that tenants SHOULD have reserves is unrealistic. It doesn’t make them bad people or ill prepared if they don’t have reserves. Their circumstances may not allow them to have reserves. So many people work and live paycheck to paycheck and this comment makes you seem very out of touch with real working communities out there. To say that they are selectively not going to pay rent in hopes of rent forgiveness..comparing them to thieves..is wrong on so many levels. That’s exactly what they don’t need. To be laid off and then accused of being thieves by their landlord. That’s just great. And honestly, if you’re not screening for savings, don’t expect them to have it.

2. You’re right. There are options out there. One of those options is unemployment. Even if it’s not quite enough, I’m sure you can work it out with your tenants temporarily. But to say they can use a CC and pay the minimum till they can get back on their feet? Ok. Drown them in debt and ruin their credit so that they rent anywhere else. Not to mention, good luck getting payments from them in the future while they’re racking up interest on their credit cards. And credit cards come with their own payment plans? Lol. Yeah it’s called let me smack you upside the head with 27% interest every so often. Ok.

3. There’s only one person to blame for not being able to get a loan? The tenant whose living paycheck to paycheck trying to make ends meet whose life you know absolutely nothing about. Or maybe the tenant with a sick parent whose financials went to hell overnight. But you blame them anyway. Not cool.

4. I’m certain that in these times, a struggling laid off tenant would love to move to a more affordable place. But I’m sure you know that moving requires money. So maybe you can offer them cash for keys so they can actually do that. Just a thought instead of wondering why they choose to stick around. Or maybe it’s all so sudden and they’re just trying to figure out what their next move is. Something to think about.

You come off as the type of person who is oblivious to the fact that there are real struggling Americans out there. That if they’re living paycheck to paycheck, it’s their fault. If they don’t have savings, it’s their fault. But everyone’s circumstances are different. You don’t know people’s walks of life. From someone who grew up in a tiny 1 bedroom apartment with 7 people (a family of refugees), whose grandfather worked EXTREMELY hard to pay the bills without government assistance, paid taxes, but still lived paycheck to paycheck, I’m here to tell you that not everyone gets things handed to them on a silver platter. I’m not saying let people live rent free. I’m saying have some compassion. Figure out a way to move forward with your tenants without kicking them while they’re down. I’m with @Mary M. . Have some compassion. It’s the least we can do for the creator of this universe whose even allowed you all that you have. It can all be lost in an instant.

"Directly from the proposed Bill:

Section 1(a) states: "Such residential tenant or small business commercial tenant shall not and shall never be required to pay any rent waived during such time period."

-------------------------------------

Don't worry about it. Constitution (applies to the States through the 14th Amendment) forbids impairing lawful contracts.

State can make it onorous (sp) to get your money, but it cannot abrogate the accrual of rent or the right to (eventually) get it unless  barred by bankruptcy  

Originally posted by @Maya Torres :

@Heather Frusco Hi Heather. Here are my thoughts relating to your post. I agree that rent is still due. Period. But although I have a mortgage to cover, I also have to face the reality that there MAY be some challenges for SOME tenants to pay rent at this time. The entire world didn’t stop working but many have been laid off so it’s a very real reality for all LL’s. I don’t know what’s going to happen or what I’m going to be faced with come April. What I do know is that I’ve never had an issue with my tenants. They’re hardworking and have never missed a rent payment. Whatever it looks like, I’m choosing to be a landlord of compassion. So many other landlords won’t agree. They’ll think it’s stupid. They’ll say I don’t know how to run a business. That I will fail. They’ll have a lot of opinions that are of absolutely no value to me. To each is own. But here’s what I think about your list:

1. To say that tenants SHOULD have reserves is unrealistic. It doesn’t make them bad people or ill prepared if they don’t have reserves. Their circumstances may not allow them to have reserves. So many people work and live paycheck to paycheck and this comment makes you seem very out of touch with real working communities out there. To say that they are selectively not going to pay rent in hopes of rent forgiveness..comparing them to thieves..is wrong on so many levels. That’s exactly what they don’t need. To be laid off and then accused of being thieves by their landlord. That’s just great. And honestly, if you’re not screening for savings, don’t expect them to have it.

2. You’re right. There are options out there. One of those options is unemployment. Even if it’s not quite enough, I’m sure you can work it out with your tenants temporarily. But to say they can use a CC and pay the minimum till they can get back on their feet? Ok. Drown them in debt and ruin their credit so that they rent anywhere else. Not to mention, good luck getting payments from them in the future while they’re racking up interest on their credit cards. And credit cards come with their own payment plans? Lol. Yeah it’s called let me smack you upside the head with 27% interest every so often. Ok.

3. There’s only one person to blame for not being able to get a loan? The tenant whose living paycheck to paycheck trying to make ends meet whose life you know absolutely nothing about. Or maybe the tenant with a sick parent whose financials went to hell overnight. But you blame them anyway. Not cool.

4. I’m certain that in these times, a struggling laid off tenant would love to move to a more affordable place. But I’m sure you know that moving requires money. So maybe you can offer them cash for keys so they can actually do that. Just a thought instead of wondering why they choose to stick around. Or maybe it’s all so sudden and they’re just trying to figure out what their next move is. Something to think about.

You come off as the type of person who is oblivious to the fact that there are real struggling Americans out there. That if they’re living paycheck to paycheck, it’s their fault. If they don’t have savings, it’s their fault. But everyone’s circumstances are different. You don’t know people’s walks of life. From someone who grew up in a tiny 1 bedroom apartment with 7 people (a family of refugees), whose grandfather worked EXTREMELY hard to pay the bills without government assistance, paid taxes, but still lived paycheck to paycheck, I’m here to tell you that not everyone gets things handed to them on a silver platter. I’m not saying let people live rent free. I’m saying have some compassion. Figure out a way to move forward with your tenants without kicking them while they’re down. I’m with @Mary Mitchell. Have some compassion. It’s the least we can do for the creator of this universe whose even allowed you all that you have. It can all be lost in an instant.

if rent was not so high they would have savings.. land lords can just lower rent and do what employees do and put it in an account for the tenants a savings account..  who says rentals should cost any more than just break even ?   two sides of the coin  :).. 

 

Originally posted by @John Clark :

"Directly from the proposed Bill:

Section 1(a) states: "Such residential tenant or small business commercial tenant shall not and shall never be required to pay any rent waived during such time period."

-------------------------------------

Don't worry about it. Constitution (applies to the States through the 14th Amendment) forbids impairing lawful contracts.

State can make it onorous (sp) to get your money, but it cannot abrogate the accrual of rent or the right to (eventually) get it unless  barred by bankruptcy  

 Thanks, John. Why do these State Senators waste time proposing legislation that's unconstitutional?

@Eric Whitman Did you read my post in its entirety? If you did, I’d like for you to tell me where I told Heather to let her tenants live in her units for free. I’ll be waiting.

Originally posted by @John Clark :

"Directly from the proposed Bill:

Section 1(a) states: "Such residential tenant or small business commercial tenant shall not and shall never be required to pay any rent waived during such time period."

-------------------------------------

Don't worry about it. Constitution (applies to the States through the 14th Amendment) forbids impairing lawful contracts.

State can make it onorous (sp) to get your money, but it cannot abrogate the accrual of rent or the right to (eventually) get it unless  barred by bankruptcy  

 That's never stopped them before.  Most recently, the Tenant Protection Act of 2019.  Rewrote many parts of our leases for us.

Originally posted by @Christopher Smith :

I for one am very concerned about this pending RENT FORGIVENESS (not deferment, not abatement--totally FREE rent) legislation in New York State. It's terrifying:

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2019/s8125

Directly from the proposed Bill: 

Section 1(a) states: "Such residential tenant or small business commercial tenant shall not and shall never be required to pay any rent waived during such time period."

The above bill is very concerning to me. I have diligently paid off most of my mortgage debt and now rely solely upon rents from my very modest portfolio of properties. How can it be constitutional to force landlords to *forgive* rents for a period of several months? How is this equitable? Landlords are no different from grocers, gas stations, doctors, clothing stores, etc. We all provide basic human needs. Why would landlords be required to give their product away for free and not grocery stores, gas stations or other providers of essential products? in NYS landlords have already had to deal with the sweeping overhaul of the landlord/tenant laws. Now they want us to forgive rent? Mortgage relief means nothing in my particular situation--the vast majority of my expenses are property taxes, insurance, water, garbage, and maintenance. There is no forgiveness for those expenses! How can we agree to provide free housing without a dollar-for-dollar reduction of these non-mortgage expenses?



Christopher,

Sounds totally illegal to me. Unfortunately it also sounds like what the once great State of New York has become.

The constitution prohibits interference with private contracts. Their is also an equal protection clause in there. I Imagine that equal protection applies to landlords too. Can't single out one group for financial destruction.

God what idiots come up with this and how do we get them out of office?

If I owned rental property in NY, I'd sell every single unit as soon as possible.

Gary

 

Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs :

if rent was not so high they would have savings.. 

 

If this was true, the savings rate in low rent neighborhoods would be higher than in high rent neighborhoods. That's obviously not the case.

 

@Robert McNeal The decisions we make now will effect the long term.  The relief package will cost a lot of money.  And that money will either need to come from somewhere. If we print more money, quantitative easing then we will eventually pay it in inflation.  The government is not going to get as much taxes during this time so there will be another deficit there as well.  These decisions will effect us.  If the citizens of the most prosperous country in the world were more responsible with money, we ourselves could whether this storm rather than have the government do it for us with strings attached.  

Sometimes it is good for things that are broken to completely fall apart.  It gives us the opportunity to rebuild much better.  And systems that don't work should be revamped.

As far as the government staying out of the rental business, this goes back to the same thing that @Jeff Cagle wrote, “a system produces what it incentivizes.” meaning that the government wants housing for its citizens so it incentivizes investors to get properties and provide housing to it's citizens and then to watch over the housing.  The problem is when the government drastically changes the rules of the game which then impedes me from being able to provide that housing according to my business plan. 

When I bought my properties, I did so with the understanding that I would be providing housing for renters.  They would pay rent, I would pay all of the costs associated with the properties and then I would be able to keep what was left as income or profit. Over time, I would be able to build equity in these assets that I would have claim to in order to one day convert that equity into money to use as I see fit. I would also save money in cash reserves in case things did not go to plan which is almost always the case. But then the government steps in and stops the inflow of money that I use to pay for the expenses of the property.  That was never a part of the business plan or was conceived as ever being possible of being part of the business plan.  Therefore, that is hard to plan for. A virus I can plan for. Natural disasters can be planned for.  The government deciding to allow people not to pay me wasn't ever something that I thought could or would happen in America. Socialist countries, sure. But not America. 

Originally posted by @Jeff Cagle :
Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:

if rent was not so high they would have savings.. 

 

If this was true, the savings rate in low rent neighborhoods would be higher than in high rent neighborhoods. That's obviously not the case.

 

I was being factitious  I know landlords are going to push rental rates as high as market will bare.. and I know that even if rents were lower said tenants would just buy more stuff :) 

 

Originally posted by @Shiloh Lundahl :


As far as the government staying out of the rental business, this goes back to the same thing that @Jeff Cagle wrote, “a system produces what it incentivizes.” meaning that the government wants housing for its citizens so it incentivizes investors to get properties and provide housing to it's citizens and then to watch over the housing.  The problem is when the government drastically changes the rules of the game which then impedes me from being able to provide that housing according to my business plan. 

We have a system made up of a huge complex set of rules and regulations. So far that system has served most of us relatively well. You can't just walk up to a complex running machine and pluck a cog out of out of it and have the rest of the machine keep running properly. That's what the government does when it intervenes in one of these well established systems. Massive unintended consequences always follow. A change in even one part necessitates a cascade of changes in all the other parts in order for things to work properly, but that's generally "too complicated" to do during a state of emergency like this.. so things just get FUBAR.

 

Originally posted by @Gary L Wallman :
Originally posted by @Dan Heuschele:
Originally posted by @Gary L Wallman:
Originally posted by @Dan Heuschele:
Originally posted by @Gary L Wallman:
Originally posted by @Dan Heuschele:
Originally posted by @David King:
Mary the state school taxes can't be paid late. The state will evict and take my houses. I have to collect over $400 per month to cover a $5,000 school tax on each of 10 properties. That's around $50,000. I am retired so this income is all I have. Please explain how your math works for me? Please don't tell me about how the tenants are going to come to my rescue when they get their jobs back I have way more experience than that. My houses are paid off. I have tried to refinance and they say I don't make enough to pay a mortgage. If you're going to tell me about a fairy tale organization that is going to come to my rescue please post their phone number so I can call them. My wife and I will be out of money if the rent doesn't come in.

Originally posted by @Mary Mitchell:

@Greg M. you left off utilities, mortgage companies, credit cards, banks.....etc.... and all of those are allowing payments to be delayed or added to the back of the amortization... utilities etc take amount owed and split it up over x months...
 

 4 people voted for this post???   You are a LL.   LL is a business.  A well run business has reserves and performs risk management.  Any financial planner would have told you to have 6 months reserve.  Clearly you should not have purchased property #10 (especially for all cash) that left you with zero reserves.  Likely you should not have purchased property #9 (again all cash).   You are the definition of over extended due to property acquisition.  This is something that is warned about everyday on BP and probably about once a week by yours truly.

You have risk due to over leverage.  Now that the risk has become a problem, you act like you played no role in creating the risk.  The reality is you created this high risk situation.  A situation that every financial planner would have pointed out is high risk.  A situation that was pointed out daily on BP as being risky.

I am not saying the tenants are coming to your rescue.  I do suspect that somehow you will be rescued, but your worse than the tenants that have no reserve.  Why?  Because you chose to invest in RE rather than maintain the reserve.  Versus many of the tenants are in their situation not due to having chose to invest the reserve, but because their living expenses do not allow them to create a reserve.

 Dan,

I couldn't disagree with you more (no offense). I have virtually no leverage and lots of reserves. But no amount of reserves is sufficient to offset a huge number of tenants in default. Make no mistake about it it is their default even if it's not entirely their fault.

When one invests in RE we plan (or should plan) for vacancies, cap-ex, taxes and other contingencies. The low rate of return we experience is based on the notion that RE is, by its very nature, a conservative investment. No one should or would expect the contingencies required to offset a large percentage of non-performing tenants. If that were entered into the equation, no one would invest in RE as the returns would be too small for the capital invested.

Let's face it, the government is the only entity large enough too create a buffer for the working folks. They should and that burden will be spread over the entire tax-paying populace.

Gary

 Our rents, including the STRs, are ~$45k.  I do as I preach.   We are in a position to handle an extended period of little/no rent.   We already know our STRs will have $0 rent.   That is ~$16k/month of lost rent. 

Do I want to lose thousands of dollars in lost rents? Of course not! I hope and expect to collect on most of any LTR deferred rent. I also am not expecting most of our tenants to not pay their rent, but I will not know until April 5th or so. I am projecting an 85% LTR rent payment. If I am correct, our rent, including the STR, will be just over $20k less than usual. That is a lot of money to be short in rent. Multiple similar months add up really fast. It will impact us by consuming reserves. It will not impact us by placing any of our RE in jeopardy or by making us not have money for essentials.

So similarly, I disagree with you.  It is possible to have reserves to handle a large number of tenants in default.   I know this because we can.  Certainly we do not want to consume our reserves.   You never know what reserves will be needed for and if they are consumed they should be replenished meaning less money available for vacations, toys, entertainment, and retirement. 

I also do not believe RE should be a low rate of return.   Because we do value adds extracting much of our initial investment, we have achieved outstanding RE returns.  Buy n hold RE is not passive.  If you are not obtain a return significantly better than the lifetime return of the S&P 500 (over 9% prior to this melt down), then you likely need to change something.  

Good luck

 Dan,

My average monthly rent collection is 3 times yours.  I only have 6 mortgages across 120+ doors, and those are ones I inherited through acquisition. I am closing on a 100k house today and a 140k one on the 31st. all cash. The point in this is that I have sufficient reserves to carry me for years and my returns have been excellent.

That being said, why would I want to give it all away now? I don't and I won't.

Good luck to you.

Gary

Your initial post indicated you did not have the reserves to cover a $400/month expense and that the state was going to evict and take your houses.  This was why @Jay Hinrichs indicated you may need to sell a property and it was the part that I was replying to.

Now you indicate you have sufficient reserves (great).  If you had not indicated you did not have reserves for a $400/month expense, I would not have replied indicating that you should have had some reserves and that not doing so was risky.  It now seems that you have reserves which is indicating you agree with the need for reserves (great).

As for "giving it away", We all would prefer to not have to spend reserves to cover for this virus (including me). The reality is that a majority of us will be coming out of this with less net worth (I am way down (over 7 digits) on two of my investment categories not including RE) than prior to this virus. Who would be happy about that? But we should be compassionate to others. I already know that I am down at least $16K in rent (the STR rent) for Mar 11 to April 16. I wish we were not down any of our rent, but it is what it is and we have the reserves that it will not force the sale of anything. We will see over the next 1.5 weeks how our LTR rents do, but I am expecting most of our tenants will pay their entire rent (my guess is we collect 85% of the due LTR rent). My reserves will be taking a hit, the only question is how large of a hit.

I hope your can somehow shield your reserves from taking a hit, but I would suggest not trying to rely on doing so.

Good luck

 Dan,

Not my original post. You're mistaken.

Gary

Your correct. It was David King that indicated he did not have reserves to cover a $400/month expense (total across all the homes) but had 10 homes with 0% LTV and indicated he could be foreclosed on. This lack of reserve is why I replied in the first place. Buying the 10th house without having enough reserves to handle $400/month expense is too risky for me.

When I got you two confused, I was hopeful that he had significant reserves and would not be forced to sell a property and that there was some sort of miscommunication (that he had not really done what he seemed to be indicating).

Sorry for confusing you.  Good luck.

Originally posted by @Wesley W. :
Originally posted by @Eddie T.:
Originally posted by @Miguel Sanchez:

@Heather Frusco I guess it depends on your state. In New York rent and mortgages are suspended for 90 days.

You are wrong sir their is no suspension of rent in NY, that is a bad rumor being spread. 

I wish it were a rumor.

There is a bill moving through both the upper and lower chambers in NYS that is looking to make that a reality.  It was drafted on Monday, and as of today it has 21 co-sponsors in the Senate.  At the rate they are going, it will be voted on next week.

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2019/s8125?fbclid=IwAR3pDKVhZZyW2fSc8jG5Y3YVfsVs96xFtz3EJOSfowLMM1bwcUymImrKNsA

 

 At a point, when I see rules like this passed, my level of sympathy for those investors decreases.  And this is why:  When you buy in a place, you take on the risks of things like weather, politics, and other factors.  I own in Houston.  I like it because I can insure against things like hurricanes.  I don't invest in California or other politically liberal areas as I can't insure against a government who views property owners as the enemy.

So when you invest in NY, and make no cash flow but just hope for appreciation -- you should know the risks from the local government there.  They are pro resident / anti landlord.  And for that type of climate you also get no return?   Yeah, no thanks.

Yeah, I do feel bad for landlords that are going to struggle just due to market forces alone right now.  But if you're extra smacked because the left leaning area you opted to invest in also kicks you while you're down -- well, don't allow yourself to have that happen. Get out of those armpits. 

@Shiloh Lundahl Again I am with you in a normal business cycle but my point is the current government response is less concerned with the long term economic impact when the bigger concern is lots and lots of people dying, hospitals overrun, no supplies, etc. Yes the relief package will cost a lot of money, but the alternative is people are unable to survive for the next couple of months. This is a short term disaster, the president is invoking war time powers as we speak. I don’t disagree with you but you are looking at this situation from one side of the coin. I wouldn’t lump this in with other regular recessions—I don’t think we have seen something like this since 1918. 

Yes I agree as you stated that the government wants housing for its citizens and provides incentives to meet these ends. That is exactly what the government is doing right now that began this thread—trying to provide housing for its citizens. I fail to see how massive government benefits in normal times to property owners is justified as securing housing for all folks yet government benefits in catastrophic times to secure housing for folks are not justified. I understand that changing the rules sucks, this sucks for everyone. No one is happy right now maybe except delivery companies and Zoom. But I don’t see how business as usual regarding evictions is a tenable stance in this crisis. 

Also QE isn’t really printing money nor was it inflationary after the financial crisis despite several rounds. 

Originally posted by @Jeff Cagle :
Originally posted by @Shiloh Lundahl:


As far as the government staying out of the rental business, this goes back to the same thing that @Jeff Cagle wrote, “a system produces what it incentivizes.” meaning that the government wants housing for its citizens so it incentivizes investors to get properties and provide housing to it's citizens and then to watch over the housing.  The problem is when the government drastically changes the rules of the game which then impedes me from being able to provide that housing according to my business plan. 

We have a system made up of a huge complex set of rules and regulations. So far that system has served most of us relatively well. You can't just walk up to a complex running machine and pluck a cog out of out of it and have the rest of the machine keep running properly. That's what the government does when it intervenes in one of these well established systems. Massive unintended consequences always follow. A change in even one part necessitates a cascade of changes in all the other parts in order for things to work properly, but that's generally "too complicated" to do during a state of emergency like this.. so things just get FUBAR.




 

Who are you referring to when you say the system has served most of us relatively well? Urban California has a massive housing affordability and homeless problem. I think many people would disagree with you, but very few of them would be landlords in California.