All Forum Posts by: Kurt K.

Kyle J. exactly! But you can't expect a parent who doesn't know how to get a good (or afford) education or a good job since they haven't experienced it and don't know how. If they knew how to live better they would. I don't think anyone truly enjoys being on welfare and to just scrape by. It's difficult for people on the outside to look in and see their struggles unless they put the effort in to actually study it, "we" all assume it's relatively easy.

Jon Klaus That sounds nice but we can't all be CEOs and we'd have a real problem if we all were. So perhaps we should pay CEOs slightly less and our workers slightly more so the CEO can still live lavishly and the workers more comfortably. It goes back to what the video states does the CEO really work 380x harder to get paid 380x more than a worker? A CEO's pay is set by the Board which is just made up of other CEO's from other companies. I really don't think any of the "Golden Parachutes" for example are really necessary. I'd argue that the CEO can still do that job if you pay him say $300,000 instead of $3,000,000. By simply cutting exorbitant pay at the top and paying the workers fairly the business can be equally successful.

Our society is to the point where we pay such an absurd amount in the financial/business industry that our engineers/mathematicians go to work for Wall Street for financial engineering (and creating NO VALUE! through day-trading) than if there were to work in the field and actually PRODUCE something. There is actually a shortage of scientists because of this. They are taken away from well paying productive jobs to go to even more well paid NON-productive jobs.

If the "game" isn't rigged... and the only significant factor is ambition than apparently only the top 10% or 1% are the ambitious ones. They are the only cohort growing in size. The middle class has been slowly fading and it is becoming a two class rich/poor society. So apparently the middle class has been lazy too. Although employee wages have remained virtually stagnant while executive pay has skyrocketed probably doesn't have anything to do with it. Any system that results in 1% of the people holding 40% of the wealth is messed up.

You acknowledge that the political-industrial complex is out of control... well that is exactly what is causing this problem. The propaganda of "All poor people are just poor because their lazy" is false. How messed up is a society where social welfare is deemed horrendous and a terrible thing, yet corporate welfare is seen as okay and a good thing we should strive for (tax breaks, subsidies, etc). It is all the political-industrial complex.. it is what has created this inequality.

I'm fortunate enough to be middle/upper class myself but I had the good fortune of my parents to help me get there, as well as the people around me. I know it would be extremely difficult to rise from an inner city to get where I am today.

To dismiss the inequality problem, and the trend that it's getting even wider, as "Oh, it is just lazy people" is ignorant.

Chris Kull What was obviously skewed? And I suppose your free land comment is true, however do we live in a free land? A recent example would be the bank bailouts. They clearly weren't "Free to fail", they were obligated to succeed.

Also, there are things such poverty traps where it makes it extremely difficult for the poor to rise up (not that it is impossible).

I'd agree that the 20 to 1 doesn't hold much weight since more likely people that agree with this idea will pass it on for their friends to watch rather than those that disagree with it.

I'm not sure what you mean by legislate ambition exactly. I think all humans have roughly the same ambition instinctively, however, if the "game" is rigged, and is not free, it deters ambition. So in that sense I think you CAN legislate ambition.

Interesting video and graph. It's something I was already aware of the the top 20% hold more than 80% of the wealth (which seems to be worse than that in this video), but I guess it helps for some to see it in a graphic.

A very large problem in our society. This type of inequality stirs up trouble.

Wow it's really gross in there! VERY dirty. But almost all of his stuff was out. there was a medium sized end table (in bad condition) and 2 floor lamps left in there.

The property has a large carriage barn so I was thinking I can store things in there for while??

But the tenant is waiting in jail and looking at at max of 15 years...

Well the former landlord has been keeping the eye on the property too as he is retired and he said everything is "cleaned out and looks the unit seems to have no damage beyond normal wear and tear". I will be looking at it tonight.

But for arguments sake, what I'm asking is, If the tenant is in jail, the unit is COMPLETELY empty. Can I rent it out to someone new now? Do I have to wait till his lease is up in April? OR do I have to evict a tenant that is in jail and has moved out completely?

The last sounds absurd to me, however, I know laws can be weird.

The former landlord suggested that I Paint/repair/etc... and rent it as soon as I can, and mentioned nothing of evictions etc, but I was wondering if this was correct.

I don't have the lease in front of me, as I'm at work... But I think it's somewhat a unique circumstance since he has already "moved out" his stuff. Most other topics in this case are asking how to get rid of the tenant's belongings when they get thrown in jail.

In my case, it's just an empty unit now, and while moved out, do I still legally have to wait for the lease to be up at the end of this month before renting it out again? Or is it fair game to put on the market.

Rob K You say that I would have to go the eviction route since I don't have his keys, then can I not legally rent out the unit till April (since his lease will be up then) even though he has presumably taken all of his belongings out of the unit?

Hi everyone. I just found out that an inherited tenant that has been late on rent has been thrown in jail yesterday for home invasion. Apparently he had his brother go to the apartment and take everything that was his out of there. While, I will lose $170 in late rent from last month his security deposit will cover this month and it was his last month on the lease anyway.

But my question is, In this apartment he paid his own utilities... and I'm going to go out on a limb and say he hasn't paid February's bill yet. I haven't called the utility company, but am I obligated to pay for his unpaid bill? Or is that strictly between him and the Utility company?

Thanks everyone!

edit: I also realize that if I'm fast to rent it again I can actually make up for his lost late rent by the overlap!

My goals in real estate are for ultimately the ability to retire younger than the average person... however now I feel like I'm getting some hints to do it sooner than later!

I just received my AARP membership cards in the mail.... I'm 28 years old.

Haha what is up with this?? for $16 a year I get great discounts and access to health insurance, as well as AARP The Magazine!!

What a weird thing to receive in the mail at my age. I guess I'm just manifesting my own retirement even earlier than I expected!