[jlokier]

The "benefit" obtained by rent is, mainly, permission.

When the authoer says landlords don't provide much benefit to society, I think they are comparing against a society in which landlords don't exist.

The author pays rent because they have no choice if they want permission to use a property; all available properties are owned by landlords.

(You can tell it's more about permission than service provided, because there are so many empty buildings, and many people would be delighted to be permitted to just go ahead and use them.)

In the alternative society where landlords don't exist, the author would not need to pay for permission. The "marginal" benefit is other things of value, such as making a nice place, and upkeep and repairs, which many landlords don't do much of.

[appleiigs]

The benefit of rent is that they are allowing you to use the property for $1,000 per month instead of having you buy the property upfront for $1,000,000.

[viklove]

What universe do you live in that a $1,000,000 property leases for $1,000/mo?

[6510]

It had me read a bit and 1% is kinda normal for a normal home. If that pushes it to far above what people can pay or to far above what rents are paid for similar properties one would usually lower it.

If there is enough inequality in the area the 0.1% rent could be realistic.

[6510]

they aren't selling they are seeking rent.

[ajhurliman]

I think you would see the benefit if you got rid of landlords and let anarchy rule real estate.

[newen]

It wouldn't be anarchy. It would be government controlled and distributed based on whatever criteria. I'm sure there are other ways to distribute it too.

You don't need to only imagine either this current system existing or anarchy.

[6510]

It already is anarchy. I can just sneeze on my land lord.