Rent Pre Revolution

[John]

Hey, I have a question, or a conundrum. It's a tad personal to share online but so be it as it pertains to my ideals. I've recently inherited some capital and have, until now, been a low/mid wage earner making around 3to4k a month on average for the last decade or so. My point. I'm wanting to exist the work force as I don't like work, as it is under capitalism. In a communist society of course the division of labor would not exist and mindless toil, as I'm use to, would give way to more free/advanced access to the means of production but here I am in the here and now in this situation. The situation of survival, as it is, I was hardly making it, BUT, givin my experience (in real estate/building) friends, financial advisers and family are pressuring me to enter the world of real estate.

Everything in my core is telling me not to extract value (profit) from other people but it's not as if the rental market doesnt already exist. My plan, if I go through with this, is to rent to people who would otherwise be denied by other landlords- with an emphasis on quality living space for them, as in, remodeling the units and keeping them in tip top shape at a decent price. I didnt ask for this scenario, didn't earn it (In the traditional sense) but it seems like the only way I know to exist wage slavery for myself. This is why I registerd n RevLeft after lurking for a while. I knida whant to know what the general feeling is surrounding oppossing private property theoretically and extracting unearned value from people as a means of selfish survival under capitalism in reality.

Am I, or will I become, a capitalist if I proceed? Please tread softly as this is a real deal issue for me. Thanks.

[Baseball]

Hey, I have a question, or a conundrum. It's a tad personal to share online but so be it as it pertains to my ideals. I've recently inherited some capital and have, until now, been a low/mid wage earner making around 3to4k a month on average for the last decade or so. My point. I'm wanting to exist the work force as I don't like work, as it is under capitalism. In a communist society of course the division of labor would not exist and mindless toil, as I'm use to, would give way to more free/advanced access to the means of production but here I am in the here and now in this situation. The situation of survival, as it is, I was hardly making it, BUT, givin my experience (in real estate/building) friends, financial advisers and family are pressuring me to enter the world of real estate.

Everything in my core is telling me not to extract value (profit) from other people but it's not as if the rental market doesnt already exist. My plan, if I go through with this, is to rent to people who would otherwise be denied by other landlords- with an emphasis on quality living space for them, as in, remodeling the units and keeping them in tip top shape at a decent price. I didnt ask for this scenario, didn't earn it (In the traditional sense) but it seems like the only way I know to exist wage slavery for myself. This is why I registerd n RevLeft after lurking for a while. I knida whant to know what the general feeling is surrounding oppossing private property theoretically and extracting unearned value from people as a means of selfish survival under capitalism in reality.

Am I, or will I become, a capitalist if I proceed? Please tread softly as this is a real deal issue for me. Thanks.

a way out would be to charge tenants their monthly costs to operate the building. that way you avoid the dangers of extracting surplus value.

the problem is that such is horribly exploitive of tenants. that is because the rents they pay would fluctuate monthly. Also, your owmership risks are reduced, since your costs are assumed by the tenants.

In othet words, a capitalist route remains the best way to treat your prospective tenants.

[Blake's Baby]

What does 'capitalist' mean here? Sure, you've invested capital; but you're not exploiting the surplus labour of these people. You might be exploiting their desperation, of course.

There is no 'clean money' in a capitalist economy. Does that mean every possible use for your money is equally moral? Probably not. But it comes to down to a personal moral code. Could you live with yourself if you were a Dickensian landlord housing people in slums and cackling when they had to sell their children to pimps? Obviously not. Could you live with yourself if you acted as a responsible landlord, provided good quality accommodation at a price that people could afford? Maybe you could.

How about this: you set up your property company, and then you pay yourself as a salaried employee of the property company. Then even if you are 'living off other people' you're not doing it any more than any other employee of any other firm that operates a 'service'. Because that's what you're doing. People are paying rent to the company for 'housing services'. You are the manager of a 'housing service company'. Not a landlord as such.

Posting in Opposing Ideologies is a weird move though, if you want a 'Leftist' view on this. Because, obviously baseball is going to give you a 'pro-capitalist' view, that's why he's restricted to OI and has a rep of -102.

[Questionable]

a way out would be to charge tenants their monthly costs to operate the building. that way you avoid the dangers of extracting surplus value.

the problem is that such is horribly exploitive of tenants. that is because the rents they pay would fluctuate monthly. Also, your owmership risks are reduced, since your costs are assumed by the tenants.

In othet words, a capitalist route remains the best way to treat your prospective tenants.

Yeah, a capitalist management style is the best choice in a capitalist market. Who would have guessed it?


In a communist society of course the division of labor would not exist

Who says this? The division of labor will still exist, it just won't be for the sake of capital.

[Blake's Baby]

...


Who says this? The division of labor will still exist, it just won't be for the sake of capital.

Not in anything like the same way though. Some people might like making bicycles and spend their whole lives making them. Other people might spend a couple of years making bikes and then re-train to fly helicopters; or they may train to fly helicopters and do that part-time while also helping out at the bike works part-time. No biggy.

[fabian]

Sure, you've invested capital; but you're not exploiting the surplus labour of these people.
Wtf? All unearned income are explotation- profit that employer takes, interenst that the lender of money takes, rent that lender of any other property takes, profit that owner of the title over intellectual property takes.


OP
If you have the money now, and can't think of usefull work for yourself to do, and use that money to organize yourself doing that usefull work, I don't see how would you do useful work after the revolution.

[Invader Zim]

The simple fact, when it comes to renting is that everybody takes the tenant for a ride - at least in my experience. I live in a very small one bedroom apartment. Yet I pay around the same amount as most other places in the UK for a small two bedroom house. Because I live in a town with a high rental population landlords know full well that they can change very large amounts for inferior properties because there will always be a market and people willing to pay. But because I work in the town I have to stay and take the hit, as do most of the other people in the same boat.

The fact is that landlords are typically out to fleece their tenants and, in particular, it is young people who suffer. So if you do get into property at least there will be one more responsible landlord who isn't going to charge people the earth simply because they can. That's how I see it.

[Decolonize The Left]

Hey, I have a question, or a conundrum. It's a tad personal to share online but so be it as it pertains to my ideals. I've recently inherited some capital and have, until now, been a low/mid wage earner making around 3to4k a month on average for the last decade or so. My point. I'm wanting to exist the work force as I don't like work, as it is under capitalism. In a communist society of course the division of labor would not exist and mindless toil, as I'm use to, would give way to more free/advanced access to the means of production but here I am in the here and now in this situation. The situation of survival, as it is, I was hardly making it, BUT, givin my experience (in real estate/building) friends, financial advisers and family are pressuring me to enter the world of real estate.

Everything in my core is telling me not to extract value (profit) from other people but it's not as if the rental market doesnt already exist. My plan, if I go through with this, is to rent to people who would otherwise be denied by other landlords- with an emphasis on quality living space for them, as in, remodeling the units and keeping them in tip top shape at a decent price. I didnt ask for this scenario, didn't earn it (In the traditional sense) but it seems like the only way I know to exist wage slavery for myself. This is why I registerd n RevLeft after lurking for a while. I knida whant to know what the general feeling is surrounding oppossing private property theoretically and extracting unearned value from people as a means of selfish survival under capitalism in reality.

Am I, or will I become, a capitalist if I proceed? Please tread softly as this is a real deal issue for me. Thanks.

I've rented for many years and if I found a landlord like the one you are saying you'd want to be I'd be very happy. As Blake's Baby put it rather succinctly:

There is no 'clean money' in a capitalist economy.
This is true.

The left is about emancipating the working class as a whole. It's not about judging you for what you need to do to better yourself in specific circumstances. We are not infallible judges, we are people like everyone else and we all need to survive and no one wants to work forever. I say you should rent out the property as you stated you wanted to do and do your best to be a good and kind landlord.

[Baseball]

The left is about emancipating the working class as a whole. It's not about judging you for what you need to do to better yourself in specific circumstances. We are not infallible judges, we are people like everyone else and we all need to survive and no one wants to work forever. I say you should rent out the property as you stated you wanted to do and do your best to be a good and kind landlord.


Socialism for thee, but not for me. The OP does not strike me as a person who would succumb to that hypocracy. That is why he posted.

[MarxSchmarx]

I hate to make revleft sound like the bar at a country club, but aside from the ethical concerns the economic realities should be discussed.

OP, I don't think being a small-time landlord in the USA (I assume youre 3-4k is in USD given your california location) is any walk in the park. First, right now it is incredibly difficult to obtain financing to build anything, certainly rental properties with the squeezes on wages and the crazy soft labor market in your state are one such area. The second issue is maintenance and recruiting tenants, and you have to find a way to stay one step ahead of creditors going into this field. Unless you are able to buy land in areas with acute housing shortages (and most land there has almost certainly been taken up already by those much richer than you) like near large schools (e.g., westwood, la jolla) it is a really questionable investment.

I think politics aside, you will be a bit foolhardy to invest in rental properties right now. The tightness of financing, the demands placed on you as a maintainer, and the incredibly slack labor market your tenants face, and the very real risk of over-supply mean that by the time you are able to get your savings to the point where a return can be expected you would have been taking a huge risk.

[The Jay]

How about this: you set up your property company, and then you pay yourself as a salaried employee of the property company. Then even if you are 'living off other people' you're not doing it any more than any other employee of any other firm that operates a 'service'. Because that's what you're doing. People are paying rent to the company for 'housing services'. You are the manager of a 'housing service company'. Not a landlord as such.


Wouldn't that just be adding a middle-man, which is also him? If he owns the company and the company owns the property then how would he not be the landlord by proxy if not explicitly?

[Blake's Baby]

'Landlord' = control of the property and pocketing any surplus from the rent.

'Property company' = control of the property, OP gets a wage based on his job of managing the portfolio, the company re-invests any surplus to increase the portfolio. He doesn't have to take share dividends or whatever. He could just be paid a wage by the company for doing a job.