[alexjplant]

> “There is a subset of people, maybe the smallest subset, who are literally making a choice not to pay rent, and we don’t do well with acknowledging that but there is a subset for whom that is the case,” [...] Others bristle at the notion that some tenants are not paying rent just because they may be able to get away with it.

These people absolutely exist. To pretend that they don't is willful ignorance. They are, however, indeed a "small[est] subset" to quote the gentleman in the article. In the era of $4 McDoubles and $6 gallons of gas I have trouble believing that one in four people is my burnout college roommate who spends on Fireball shots and Xbox games instead of paying rent. Life is expensive these days.

[rdtsc]

> They are, however, indeed a "small[est] subset" to quote the gentleman in the article.

The numbers don't have to stay small because this behavior is not generated independently in a population. Multiple people may become aware of it by talking to each other, social media, forums, some crazy news event that refers to it, etc. All of the sudden a lot more people decide they can do it as well and tell their friends.

I am not defending it or saying one side is right or wrong just that when it comes to things like this there may be a different model at play on how this behavior is generated.

[jandrewrogers]

I anecdotally know of a few cases in Seattle where tenants with high incomes that could easily pay just don't. There is a subculture that actively encourages this type of behavior and the laws are setup such that there are almost no consequences for it. I've also met people who bragged about doing it. While rare, it is still common enough that it has become a real problem and has become socially acceptable in some circles.

It is corrosive to the social contract when government policy tacitly encourages this behavior.

[CursedSilicon]

As someone who also lives in Seattle, I'd be curious to see any verifiable citations to such a wild claim

[lelandfe]

I only know of one https://komonews.com/news/local/twitter-shutdown-seattle-off...

[CursedSilicon]

I mean, Elmo's SpaceX is busy lying about being "In Redmond" too (they're in Redmond Ridge, a significantly more rural area about 6 miles away)

[abhinai]

He said “anecdotally”. In any case, I was wondering that if I know a friend who does this, how could I ever present a verifiable citation for it? You may have to rethink your ask.

[CursedSilicon]

Anecdotes aren't usually admissible as evidence, is the thing

[morkalork]

In my city, and I assume many others, there's an informal landlord's group that shares lists of problem tenants to avoid renting to. While problematic, I wonder if it's made any impact.

[seanmcdirmid]

Usually this is handled with credit reports right? It’s only when the state forbids landlords from demanding credit reports that informal networks are necessary.

In general as a tenant you can only get away with not paying rent once (until eviction happens, no one will ever rent to you again without federal or state assurances), and as a landlord you will only skip the credit report requirement once (because your first tenant is going to be a deadbeat who screw’s you).

[nradov]

In cities with excessive tenant protection laws, sometimes landlords will negotiate agreements with deadbeat tenants in which the tenant agrees to leave and the landlord doesn't report anything to the credit bureaus.

[polski-g]

Credit reports do not have a section for "plays music loudly" or "secretly smokes by the bathroom window".

[naturalmovement]

There's entire Reddit communities of these people where they encourage and validate their shitty behavior.

With some of the stories I've read, you'd have to be positively insane to be a small-time landlord these days, especially in these large cities with kooky renter protections that make it nearly impossible to evict someone.

Go watch Pacific Heights with Michael Keaton for a fictionalized account but this stuff absolutely happens every day.

I saw one recently where the renter has not paid rent for six years and is unable to be evicted. It made national news.

So where does that leave the industry? You eventually push out the mom and pop landlords by making the regulations so insane it only leaves behind the large corporate property management companies and their army of lawyers. Who will collude and drive rents up. It's a vicious cycle and these cities are not helping one bit.

[nradov]

Tenant "protection" laws are the type of idiocy that economically illiterate progressive politicians always produce. They end up having the opposite effect by making property owners less willing to rent out to anyone. The only effective way to protect tenants is to set public policies that encourage new housing development. When there is a housing surplus, the laws of economics force landlords to treat tenants well. Build more housing!

[woodruffw]

There's an economic floor for the price of housing: the amortized cost of the building and its maintenance, plus taxes and overhead imposed by governments, utilities, mortgages, etc.

In other words: even in a plentiful housing market, there will always be someone who struggles to pay rent (including transiently), because a rational housing market can't offer $0 rents. Tenant protection laws exist to protect that person from a landlord who would otherwise be incentivized to throw them onto the street.

[senectus1]

sure because a property owner is going to not rent out a property and just take the month on month hit for having an empty property. They'll either rent it or sell it.

There is a middle ground, just need to find that point.

[nradov]

Apparently you haven't been paying attention to what's happening in the rental market. Landlords in cities with strong tenant protection laws will absolutely leave a unit vacant for months until they find someone with a high income ratio and credit score. This leaves poorer people stuck with no options.

[rationalist]

I have friends and coworkers that want to have rental properties, and I advise them it's not worth it.

I don't want to be in a position where I have to pay more to fix damages than I collectected in rent if I accidentally rent to deadbeats. Or in a position where I have to provide services to someone not paying me.

One of those friends has parents that rented out their old house to deadbeats at the top of the housing market instead of selling it. Those deadbeats have been nothing but trouble and yet my friend still wants to be a landlord.

Somehow the idea of owning rental properties became a pervasive notion in the U.S.

[_DeadFred_]

Wage theft is the number one form of theft in the USA at around $15 billion. Hopefully you advised your friends to avoid working for wages as that is the number one way to be ripped off by deadbeats in the USA.

Somehow the idea of working for wages became a pervasive notion in the U.S.

https://www.denver7.com/news/national-politics/the-race/wage...

[jen20]

If you think the Reddit communities of tenants are bad, you should try reading the Reddit communities of landlords (at least the UK ones).

[mc3301]

Yeah.... So many bad tenants. So many bad landlords... So many weird laws protecting and hurting both.

What if we shifted to a different system?

[weakfish]

The question that many do not want to think about. We (as a society (referring to all Western Liberalism, not just the US)) are so thoroughly convinced that Liberal Democracy is the End of History, and it's the 'flawed but best,' as many say, but refuse to imagine something better.

It's puzzling that a system that is supposed to reward creativity and genius like capitalism limits it's inhabitants in their imagination when it comes to how one might structure society.

I don't claim to have the answer, and _no,_ my issues with Liberal Democracy/Capitalism don't mean I'm a communist / socialist / thing-people-don't-like.

[_DeadFred_]

It's not Liberal Democracy that is the problem but a society where all of the slack has been optimized out, every extraction maximized, every infraction forever a scarlet letter on an individual, zero stability but constant crisis inflicted on individuals. There is no room in modern day America for people in the margins. Society needs to make a place for them and a path out of constant crisis, or the homeless problem will continue to grow.

Another hidden issue in the USA is many households are dependent on contributing income from a retired/disabled/working past retirement age elderly parent/family member. Those people are going to start passing in mass, and a lot of households will become even less resilient.

[nradov]

What would you like us to imagine? So far everything that we've tried at scale other than liberal democracy and capitalism has inevitably led to war, famine, and genocide. Western liberalism appears to be the only system that empirically works. Some would claim that "socialism with Chinese characteristics" works better, but if you look below the surface prosperity in first-tier cities the actual economic situation is rather grim and the human rights situation is horrific.

[margalabargala]

Arguably, benevolent dictatorships tend to be the best. Singapore is a good example.

The trouble is making a system that can guarantee the "benevolent" part in the longer term.

[8note]

This is a bit of an intentional result, no?

the goal is for peoppe to own the places they live in

[nradov]

Why should that be a goal?

[fyredge]

To discourage rent seeking behaviour?

[CursedSilicon]

Because every human being needs shelter?

[nradov]

Having shelter is not the same as owning real estate.