[bick_nyers]

I agree that the underlying issue is a lack of supply. However, if a landlord is commanding a 30% profit margin on a non-luxury apartment then I think they are contributing to the problem (to be clear, I'm not insinuating anyone in this thread is doing this). I think the only objective way to tell if it's priced too high is by the profit margin, but of course even that can be inflated if e.g. a developer took a huge margin on it before selling it to a new owner.

As to what an "ethical and not terrible for society" profit margin would be is above my pay grade, but I would estimate 15%. It also probably depends on how easily you can make money on the stock market as well.

[matwood]

You know what gets developers excited about building? Someone getting consistent 30% profit margins.

Now, government just has to get out of the way and let housing be built.

[WarOnPrivacy]

> You know what gets developers excited about building? Someone getting consistent 30% profit margins.

It's super subdued excitement.

> Now, government just has to get out of the way and let housing be built.

Homeowner voting blocs aren't commonly considered to be government.

[itake]

> However, if a landlord is commanding a 30% profit margin

Landlords of properties paying 7%+ interest have negative profit margin and can't compete with 2-3% interest rates.

By some landlords having a 30% profit margin, other landlords can have a positive ROI (increasing rental supply)

[HDThoreaun]

Business arent charities. Almost every one is trying to maximize profits.

[bugglebeetle]

Landlords also aren’t businesses. They’re a class of parasitic rentiers who siphon off wealth from economic activity around them and use corrupt means to prevent competition (mostly bribing politicians to constrain supply).