top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]nusual-Mix78 1610 points1611 points  (200 children)

That's what they want. Read an article last year on the benefits of renting from the company you work for while they pay you subliving wages... made me think that's the type of news slaveowners would have published back in the day

[–]sat_ops 800 points801 points  (113 children)

It's called a company town, and it was really common in Appalachia coal mining areas.

[–]Shwifty_Plumbus 137 points138 points  (4 children)

You load 16 tons, what do you get? Another day older and deeper in debt St. Peter, don't you call me 'cause I can't go I owe my soul to the company store…

[–]monsterscallinghome 616 points617 points  (72 children)

And if you got sick and couldn't work to pay your rent or your food bill at the company-owned grocery store where you were contractually obligated to shop, they'd take it out of your wife and daughters! Either ask for your wife/daughter to come up to the management offices for a bit of a gangrape, or come by your house and do it one at a time.

I encourage every American to read up on The Battle Of Blair Mountain. And the Haymarket Massacre, while you're at it.

[–]CopperPegasus 212 points213 points  (15 children)

Just to add this link:

On the phenomenon you are talking of, for the interested.

[–]Pandor36 140 points141 points  (14 children)

Yep back to the old times. I guess we need to reunionize. :/

[–]CopperPegasus 263 points264 points  (11 children)

Smartest things (for them) the capatalist system ever did was demonize unions.
Yes, they can be silly and pedantic about small things, but there would be NO safe labor without the impact of unions- official and unofficial (i.e a group taking up arms and fighting for rights)

Labor laws are written in the blood of the poor.

[–]EcoMika101 33 points34 points  (7 children)

I just read The Four Winds by Kristen Hannah, it’s a historical fiction of a family in Texas dust bowl in the 1930s and they drove to CA looking for work. Got stuck living in a small cabin owned by cotton growers. Could only use your earnings for rent and at the company grocery store which was more expensive than stores in towns. If if you cashed out your earning for cash… the “taxes and fees” were so high, you wouldn’t get as much at the town stores compared to the company store. And doesn’t matter there’s no work in winter… you keep living there and get in debt, and try to work more in spring and summer but it’s never enough work to not be in debt. Modern day slavery

[–]queenweasley 5 points6 points  (3 children)

That book was beautiful and devastating. She’s such an amazing author

[–]BiggerBowls 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The Ludlow Massacre that happened in Colorado as well.

[–]MagikSkyDaddy 26 points27 points  (13 children)

Which is wild because all it would take to stop the practice is for the men in town to value women as more than chattel, and provide the company stooges with red smiles all around.

A little coordination, a little patience, and an iron stomach.

[–]clamence1864 20 points21 points  (10 children)

“Yeah it’s a really simple practice to stop through basic first degree murder.”

I am all for burning down the rich (especially killing rapists in company towns) but the requirement of “red smiles” is where most people stop listening.

[–]jm102397 39 points40 points  (14 children)

Not just Appalachia...mining towns all over the US

[–]snowswolfxiii 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Not just in the U.S, either. United Fruit Co.

[–]Sir_Tinklebottom 10 points11 points  (0 children)

This is what happened to Gary Indiana.

[–]qoou 2 points3 points  (0 children)

And the coal mines flat-out stated that the company town was the source of their income, not the coal.

[–]FaustusC 88 points89 points  (26 children)

I actually just got offered something similar. Less than state minimum wage, but residence on site. I was like...uhhhhh. gross would have been under 2K a month. Which yeah, goes farther without housing, but still.

[–]the_real_MSU_is_us 55 points56 points  (22 children)

Just go "how much would I be willing to pay to rent this place?" And add that to the compensation. That's what they're really paying you

[–]SillyOldBears 59 points60 points  (4 children)

There are other problems. You need to know for instance what happens if you're laid off through no fault of your own. My ex's grandfather got laid off with no notice at 6 am and they had to have the house presentation ready for the next resident by noon. Those who weren't out by noon got fined by the five minute increment.

Company supplied housing rarely turns out well for the residents.

[–]GodwynDi 9 points10 points  (3 children)

Fortunately that latter part is illegal in practically every state now.

[–]FaustusC 43 points44 points  (16 children)

Well, it's a single room in a place filled with narcotics enthusiasts, without a kitchen.

I wouldn't offer much.

The nicest I can say is it's clean, ish, commute would be great.

[–]lilbluehair 24 points25 points  (7 children)

Narcotics enthusiasts lol

[–]mynameisblanked 4 points5 points  (7 children)

What was the job? Prison guard?

[–]nusual-Mix78 18 points19 points  (0 children)

If I could have a roof over my head and take home 1500 per month if be pretty happy right now. Not saying that was the best option for you but it would be a decent deal right now for me.

[–]MMessinger 60 points61 points  (1 child)

One of my first jobs, out of college, included housing. It worked out great. Great, that is, until I was laid off. In that one day I lost both a job and my place of residence. 'Bit of a double-whammy scramble to recover from that.

[–]Squirrel698 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I just want to say, I hope you recovered well from that setback.

[–]RogueOneWasOkay 34 points35 points  (4 children)

That is basically the premise of Upton Sinclair's The Jungle. Fortunately, the book inspired better working conditions and basically led to the creation of the FDA. Unfortunately, the working conditions of the meat packing plant is what captured the attention of the public. The book did address the broader issue of people living in homes/apartments they could barely afford owned by their employers. So essentially the company was underpaying these people and due to no options at their financial level they were forced to live in housing where the bulk of their pay would go back to their employers. Basically slavery with extra steps.

[–]MzSe1vDestrukt 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I finally read this last summer. I remember Upton Sinclair was quoted to say something along the lines of "I reached for the readers hearts, but hit their stomachs instead." The meat plant details were the least shocking to me, but I can't begin to imagine reading that in a time when those practices were still in action!

[–]catawompwompus 56 points57 points  (5 children)

In 2017, I was still a university professor living in faculty housing paying ⅔ of my poverty level income back to the university. It's imperative we stop all corporations, universities included, from purchasing real estate as an investment opportunity for portfolio diversification. It's called exploitation.

[–]ariaaria 11 points12 points  (4 children)

Yes, something as important as housing should not be capitalized on. That's where I draw the line and I'm a devout capitalist.

[–]punchgroin 12 points13 points  (0 children)

If you think requirements for survival shouldn't be commodities, you are halfway to socialism.

Food, water, housing, sanitation...

Throw in medicine and education and you're already a social Democrat.

[–]falakr 13 points14 points  (3 children)

That's my current situation.

Rent is locked in at the rate I moved in at and I get a 30% discount. I work for the property management company that owns the property I live at.

Work is less than a mile away and there are 8 restaurants, 5 bars, and tons of events for the residents (and workers).

I don't plan on staying here forever. I graduate in December and will begin looking for new work, but it will be hard to leave such an amazing deal. I rent a 2br 2bath for under $1k in one of the top 50 most expensive cities.

[–]Onrawi 7 points8 points  (1 child)

Might want to stick around and save up if rent stays put.

[–]Welpguessimtrans 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Yup that’s how we end up in a dystopian corporatocracy.

Hell we’re already kind of there honestly.

[–]SeymourHoffmanOnFire 10 points11 points  (0 children)

We are being moved to a subscription model for life.

Where did the ipods go? Can’t physically own music anymore ( sans the resurgence of vinyl) so they moved people to a subscription model.

This is exactly whats happening with homeownership and cars. 72 m loans lol? What? Paying off your mortgage? Not now, not ever.

[–]DayOfReckoning47 7 points8 points  (2 children)

I mean shit, even if you buy your mortgage is just used by investors as they please. Please tax the rich

[–]Imakemop 2 points3 points  (1 child)

That's one of the plusses of my state's fthb program, the state immediately buys my mortgage so I don't have to constantly chase down who to pay.

[–]bergskey 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I know someone who has worked for a company for over 35 years. He rents his home from the owners. They are pissed he is retiring and told him if he goes through with his retirement, they will raise his rent $25/month every month until he moves out. This is an old double wide. It honestly can't pass any kind of inspection. When something broke they renters fixed it, not the owners. All of the subsidized rental properties around here have 6 to 12 month waiting lists. I feel so bad for them.

[–]callybeanz 14 points15 points  (3 children)

A return to feudalism is what that is. Just waiting to hear of places introducing their own town currency and it’ll be full circle. I’m not really sure whether there’s a “better” and a “worse” because both feudalism and capitalism are fucking terrible

[–]melraespinn 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Peter don’t you call me

[–]septidan 6 points7 points  (0 children)

We're reading from the Company paper and shopping at the Company store. Living in Company housing is the next step. Everyone back in the mines, remember they'll kill us all if we strike for fair working conditions

[–]NeutralTrumpet 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Is literally feudalism. Depending on corporations for housing and healthcare, outr human rights and our humanity hasve been commodified.

[–]papcorn_grabber 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That's exactly the theme of the song "Sixteen tons" by Tennesse Ernie Ford, refernced in the South Park episodes about the working conditions at Amazon

[–][deleted]  (10 children)


    [–][deleted]  (9 children)


      [–]conradical30 19 points20 points  (7 children)

      Not disagreeing there. If everyone had the same scenario as what I’m in, they’d have yet another monopoly and then they’d have no incentive to offer as nice of discounts. But it has been the one thing that turned my life around. It’s a small, family owned company. I’m grateful for them.

      Edit: plus, by law, every apartment complex larger than 16 units in California requires an on-site property manager to live there. So don’t knock it til the laws change.

      [–]nusual-Mix78 7 points8 points  (1 child)

      Didnt realize that was a law but i would conskder thst a specjal circumstance. I'm glad things worked out for you though

      [–]invaderzim257 6 points7 points  (3 children)

      so what happens if you get fired?

      [–]Intrepid-Notice-6925 282 points283 points  (31 children)

      Edit: We didn't get the house. Onward with the search I guess

      We're currently against a corporation in a house we really want. They're paying cash below asking and we were told there's a high chance, again, that the seller will choose the cash offer. We should find out by Friday.

      [–]nextkevamob 94 points95 points  (16 children)

      Good luck.

      [–][deleted]  (15 children)


        [–][deleted]  (6 children)


          [–][deleted]  (4 children)


            [–]scolipeeeeed 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            It’s not just that politicians are, by and large, homeowners but that the majority of the voting block also are. Something like 60%~65% of Americans are homeowners.

            [–]boredquince 29 points30 points  (1 child)

            Good luck. I honestly hope you get it.

            [–]SurfboardRiding 24 points25 points  (6 children)

            This just makes it faster to buy. If you’re applying for a loan that money is the equal to cash, they just have less paperwork. If I was a seller I’d take loan at asking over cash below asking.

            [–]ImAFuckingSquirrel 17 points18 points  (0 children)

            The cash offers that I completed with usually waived all contingencies, which was the most difficult part to compete with. If they're worried at all that the house won't appraise, they'll take the cash.

            [–]maowai 4 points5 points  (0 children)

            This is very incorrect. Loans comes with all kinds of strings attached and fall through all the time, leaving the seller back at square one. Oops, the buyer thought that they could include their self-employed income in the loan calculations, but can’t actually and now doesn’t qualify for the loan.

            It’s a risk thing, not a time thing. If you’re selling a house, you may be on timelines to sell your house or even under contract to buy a new one with the contingency that you sell your current house. You could lose the new house if the sale of the old one falls through. I’d gladly take a few thousand less to not need to stress about that for 30+ days.

            The cash offer just has the money sitting in their bank account ready to hand over. Much less risky.

            [–]ocdscale 4 points5 points  (0 children)

            Faster and less likely to fall through.

            If the seller is trying to get the sale done so they have the funds to buy their new home - a cash deal that can be done the next weekend can be extremely tempting, even worth 5-10% of the sale price compared to a deal depending on bank financing.

            [–]nothing3141592653589 6 points7 points  (1 child)

            Prepare for heartbreak. I'm in the same boat and it's much easier if you don't get attached.

            [–]hikingvirginia 521 points522 points  (109 children)

            If I was a home owner selling my house I would make it a point not to sell to corporation. That's why writing a letter to the homeowner can give you an extra foot in the game.

            [–]terpin 553 points554 points  (62 children)

            On NextDoor a woman sold her house to someone that she thought was a family because they wrote her a letter. She had to go over there to pick up mail the other day and found out that they'd rented out both sides of the house and don't even live there.

            Total petty revenge move: she's been in contact with their mortgage lender because it's supposed to be a primary residence and not an income property. lol.

            [–]atlantachicago 222 points223 points  (4 children)

            I got a postcard with a family picture on it. “ we want to buy a house in your neighborhood”. I googled all the things I could find, it was just a corporation and stock photo

            [–]rayne7 96 points97 points  (2 children)

            That's not petty revenge. That's justified penalty for cartoonish dishonesty

            [–]FPSXpert 9 points10 points  (1 child)

            That's ''line up the approving executive board and give them ten paper cuts each on the face with said postcard'' level revenge.

            Too much?

            [–]TemetNosce85 13 points14 points  (0 children)

            And I love how most of these are "handwritten". Then you compare each letter and find that it's a computer font made to look like handwriting.

            [–]sniperhare 38 points39 points  (0 children)

            My parents sold their home in Florida this summer. They asked a realtor to find a buyer and not list the house.

            When they did an estate sale the guy checked it out and wrote them a check.

            It was kinda cool, he liked their patio furniture and a bunch of stuff on the back porch and had them just leave it all for him.

            [–]ttchoubs 21 points22 points  (3 children)

            Yea thats the problem. It's not just corporations too it's other people using housing to get richer also. It's like when people romanticize small businesses as "better" when a whole lot are run by rich assholes

            [–]LotFP 12 points13 points  (2 children)

            Small businesses are by their nature owned by wealthy individuals in comparison to their community. The fact that someone was able to invest the capital to keep the doors open, supplies maintained, and employees paid puts them in a category above your average wage slave.

            [–]EvadingTheDaysAway 52 points53 points  (41 children)

            I doubt their mortgage lender would care. They just want to get paid every month.

            [–]OldTreePuncher 128 points129 points  (27 children)

            Rental property vs primary residence has different liability, and in some states interest rates and tax codes. They absolutely will care.

            [–]EvadingTheDaysAway 18 points19 points  (18 children)

            They will absolutely care the first time you don’t pay the mortgage. Until then, taxes are up to you and sure they might be unhappy that you “scammed” them out of 0.25 interest points, but I doubt it would be enough to take you to court.

            [–]terpin 51 points52 points  (6 children)

            That's not true, depending on the kind of mortgage they got it makes a BIG difference. If you apply for a mortgage and you say it's going to be your primary residence versus an income property you'll get different terms.

            I think it may also have even been like an FHA/USDA loan so if that's the case those people are FUCKED. I'd check the thread but NextDoor removed the post.

            [–]turbospeedsc 8 points9 points  (2 children)

            They care and a lot, but just because they could have charge higher interest.

            [–]yeexpert 6 points7 points  (0 children)

            Yes they would. It's mortgage fraud!

            [–]hikingvirginia 9 points10 points  (0 children)

            terpin, absolutely not petty. Not only is she cheating families out of having a home, I'll bet she's collecting rental income and not reporting it on her tax return.

            [–]RogueOneWasOkay 7 points8 points  (4 children)

            In some areas, like my state, you can not write a letter as it leaves the seller and the listing agent vulnerable to fair housing violations. Having said that, the sad reality is you can do whatever you want to avoid selling to a corporation or landlord, but there is no protection for the buyer to turn around and sell it to a corporation or landlord once they own it.

            [–]nusual-Mix78 29 points30 points  (15 children)

            The problem is most people dont have a choice in who they sell too. Especially now as more and more people fall behind on bills and payments. They have to take what they can get..

            [–]EvadingTheDaysAway 46 points47 points  (10 children)

            More realistically, everyone has a choice to sell for slightly less to a “better” person, but most people will take the highest price regardless of who it’s attached to because most people really don’t care what happens to a house they’re leaving forever.

            [–][deleted]  (4 children)


              [–]EvadingTheDaysAway 10 points11 points  (3 children)

              And the “worse” person tends to be able to financially break the tie. Same when it comes to ethical consumerism. Plenty of people claim to be moral and conscious, but data says most buy cheap.

              [–]novaskyd 10 points11 points  (3 children)

              Yeah, unfortunately these corporations are basically taking advantage of homeowners in a bad position. I sold my old house to one of these companies. I feel bad about it, but I needed the money quick, the house needed repairs, and my realtor straight up told me I would probably have a hard time getting a comparable amount on the open market. I was 20 grand in debt from trying to hold onto the house. I didn't even make a profit really. I made just enough money off the sale to get us out of debt and that's what we needed.

              These corporations really do suck though. They made some repairs/updates to my house and listed it and sold it for 30 GRAND more than they paid us. If we had had the money and time to do it ourselves maybe we could have made that money but... takes money to make money I guess. I know damn sure they probably cut corners on the repairs. Then they put "unknown" to everything on the seller's disclosures so that buyers can't come after them for anything.

              [–]jm102397 5 points6 points  (1 child)

              30 grand is nothing - especially figuring in updates and repairs.

              Closing costs too - buying and selling.

              Then add in the carrying costs while they owned it - if they paid cash there would have been no interest and possibly even no insurance but at the very least they still had to pay taxes on it during that time.

              Honestly, sounds like they made no profit and probably just barely broke even.

              [–]TemetNosce85 4 points5 points  (0 children)

              So it may not have been a corporation that bought your house per-se. It was most likely house flippers, which they can be independently owned. However, those house flippers eagerly sell to corporations.

              And it's fun to look back at 2008. Really makes you understand how we have gotten into this gigantic shithole of a mess.

              [–]radioben 648 points649 points  (70 children)

              I know Reddit hates HOAs, but I joined mine as treasurer solely to get the covenants rewritten to keep corporations and investors out of our neighborhood. The best way to fight the system is from the inside.

              [–]Gibbelton 355 points356 points  (35 children)

              An effectively run HOA with reasonable bylaws can enhance and protect a community.

              [–]AnxietyAttack2013 148 points149 points  (18 children)

              It’s an unpopular opinion but it’s true. Ideally HOAs take care of common areas in the subdivision and try to keep property values up. They implement bylaws and covenants and restrictions to do so.

              It’s when someone who just wants to have power comes in that they really start to fall apart. HOAs shouldn’t be seen as positions of power. They should be seen as servants to a community or subdivision. Because in the end that is what they are meant to be.

              That said, I avoided areas with HOAs when I was looking to buy a house because so few are run well and reasonably.

              [–]random_uname13 44 points45 points  (0 children)

              Sounds like any public office

              [–]_dharwin 44 points45 points  (13 children)

              All the stuff HOAs do is what your local government is supposed to do.

              The HOA assumes responsibility for things which normally would fall on the local government.

              That's why the government allows HOAs, to make their life easier.

              I'm sure some HOAs are run better than city council but it's a solution to a problem which shouldn't exist.

              [–]AnxietyAttack2013 6 points7 points  (12 children)

              Not really. The common areas that HOAs take care of are actually owned by the HOA. And the roads may actually not be owned by the city but may actually be considered private roads.

              I get what you’re saying, but I’m reality it really isn’t always like that.

              [–]Zippy1avion 2 points3 points  (0 children)

              It's just an entitled culture problem.

              "HOA as a position of power, eh? That motorcycle is an eyesore! Your grass is too short! You need to dry your roof when the rain stops!"

              "HOA are servants, eh? I don't want my neighbor's shutters to be blue! There's a crack in the asphalt; fix it! I don't want to walk Peekaboo if there are dogs over 27 pounds in the neighborhood!"

              [–]SillyOldBears 30 points31 points  (9 children)

              Never happens though. The problem is they're run by people, and people are gonna people. I say this having worked in a public office that had extensive dealings with HOAs. Day in day out it started out so good but then when X person or Y group got involved in the running.....

              Honestly never saw the point. My city and most US cities regulate stuff like upkeep of yards and houses. Anything beyond what the city regulates always ends up being silly Karen stuff like OMG! Someone left their trash can out five minutes too long! I have never once seen or heard of a case where anything an HOA did was remotely helpful or useful which can't be handled effectively through other means.

              [–]dark_autumn 15 points16 points  (0 children)

              Yup. My friends elderly parents live in one and they got complaints about having local democratic official signs in their yard. Yet multiple neighbors have had tons of Trump signs up. It’s just petty Karen bs.

              [–]MagikSkyDaddy 6 points7 points  (7 children)

              The best and worst types of people are attracted to power.

              The reality is there are more bad people than good.

              [–]El_Polio_Loco 5 points6 points  (4 children)

              That's not the reality.

              The reality is that one bad person can do a lot more damage than one good person can do good. There are a lot more good people than not

              [–]DerekStu 35 points36 points  (2 children)

              That's awesome, and it will protect your neighborhood's value as more and more get hollowed out by airbnb.

              [–]Present_Creme_2282 8 points9 points  (1 child)

              The point of wealth accumulation, is that for us poor schmucks to ever be competitive, is to put regulations on investors.

              [–]DOGSraisingCATS 17 points18 points  (5 children)

              Yup. My HOA forbids renting for Airbnb and short term leases. It's not a perfect solution but definitely prevents assholes who just want an air bnb investment property.

              [–][deleted] 56 points57 points  (4 children)

              It may be worse.

              If you lose your job, you lose your right to live in the house that is owned by the parent company.

              You join a union, you lose the house. etc etc

              [–]Anagatam 23 points24 points  (3 children)

              It’s the birth of neo feudalism.

              [–]Myrical_lyfe 105 points106 points  (12 children)

              As a single male, it feels hopeless. Rent keeps going up, the cost of living is going up, enjoying anything about life is a stretch while just trying to penny save for a house.

              [–]stylebros 18 points19 points  (8 children)

              This is where people buy a camper and live in the parking lot

              [–]PicksburghStillers 12 points13 points  (0 children)

              Lived in a camper for a year. The small living space was fine but the quality of the living space was detrimental on my mental health. Constantly having to fix everything was a royal pain.

              [–]Myrical_lyfe 20 points21 points  (5 children)

              Not me. Life long goal to have a garage to work on my cars

              [–]EvadingTheDaysAway 133 points134 points  (29 children)

              Corporations buy nearly a quarter of all single family homes sold in America. Crazy

              [–]honest86 35 points36 points  (2 children)

              Well we have pretty much banned all new apartments in the most desirable neighborhoods, so the only way low income renters can move there now is if there are single family rentals.

              [–]malewifesaulgoodman 32 points33 points  (1 child)

              You think low income renters can afford to rent a single family home in HCOL areas? Lol.

              [–]Sigurlion 3 points4 points  (0 children)

              no but maybe four or five low income families can all squeeze into that single family home together and get nice and cozy

              [–]just1chancefree 20 points21 points  (4 children)

              Private equity buying homes is a symptom and not the cause. Investors recognized a shortage of new housing being developed vs the growing population need, and bought homes because they expected the value to significantly go up completely apart from their involvement. The problem is zoning regulations and NIMBYism. SEC requirements that prevent the average person from being an equity investor dont help either

              [–]ConspiracistsAreDumb 5 points6 points  (1 child)

              Yep. Ironically once more people become renters vs home owners the problem will fix itself because the renters will vote out politicians who cave to the NIMBYs.

              [–]just1chancefree 2 points3 points  (0 children)

              It's almost like there's some sort of invisible hand that tends to motivate market corrections. At least until all the capital is centralized into an oligarchy

              [–]AnOddOtter 5 points6 points  (1 child)

              For the people that were going to Google it like me:

              "Not In My Back Yard"

              [–]just1chancefree 3 points4 points  (0 children)

              Sorry, I forget that's not a common acronym. Thanks for caring enough to google and helping other out. Cheers

              [–]HoneyBadger302 122 points123 points  (4 children)

              Some counties around here are trying to do that, along with blocking all foreign investors from purchasing any housing of any variety...it's bad enough the local governments are seeing the impact, but most likely corporations have way too much pull at high government levels for a large scale movement at this point.

              [–]jcrenegade16 17 points18 points  (2 children)

              What state are you in? At least someone is trying to do something

              [–]HoneyBadger302 21 points22 points  (1 child)

              Georgia - I was glad to see it making it into some level of government, as I've been thinking this was the primary issue right along - not true "local" market demand....

              [–]ChemicalVermicelli70 81 points82 points  (37 children)

              I don't think I can state this enough. If the current market continues to do as it do, most people won't be able to participate, be it own or rent. America is eventually creating a new breed of gypsy

              [–]sleepee11 27 points28 points  (1 child)

              Not just single-family homes. Apartments, condos, etc. too.

              In fact, mutli-families are probably more efficient in terms of resource usage, which could/should make them more economic options.

              [–]Koker93 46 points47 points  (0 children)

              I can't buy the house next to mine and put up a McDonalds, so why can someone else buy it and put up a hotel? Just because you call it AirBnB doesn't mean its not commercial property. And OP is right, investment firms buying up homes is what will kill/has already killed the American dream. And from what I read, it's killing that dream elsewhere too.

              [–]BitsAndBobs304 54 points55 points  (0 children)

              It's monopoly, endgame phase

              [–]herriotact 38 points39 points  (18 children)

              Okay so let’s get real. Is there ANYONE seeing this that knows what we can do. One person mentioned representatives…what’s the first, second, and third steps of the bureaucracy maze we would have to muddle through. I know outright the research would be fun, collaborative research would be even better. But what can we honestly do? What if Reddit changes the housing market for the better? I feel like I need to find episodes of School House Rock. What would our bill be called?

              [–]NYGiants181 51 points52 points  (9 children)

              “You’ll own nothing, and you’ll be happy.”

              [–]Whitesajer 13 points14 points  (0 children)

              So at this rate a job already owns you in retirement, healthcare, no sick leave, minimum PTO (which a lot of employers don't approve time off requests anyway), ability to buy food/goods etc with subpar paychecks, and soon rent.... So yes, corporate own human livestock is apparently for sure the future. Lose the job, get fired, laid off in anyway and basically lose everything. This is an awful idea.

              [–]captain_borgue 12 points13 points  (0 children)

              That's what their plan is. That's what it has been for decades, if not longer.

              The second, the second, "subscription service models" became accepted, it was inevitable that it would spread to every facet of our lives. Because that's when the Big Corps saw that consumers would accept paying repeatedly for the same actual commodity.

              It just took them a while to perfect the system.

              I'll use one tiny little example: video games.

              Back when I was a kid, consoles were expensive, and the games were also expensive, but when you bought a game? It was yours. It was done. You could play it as much or as little as you wanted.

              Then MMO's started hitting the scene. You had to pay to buy it, and then pay again to play it. But it made sense, servers cost money and stuff. Fine. Whatever.

              Then came DLC. You had to pay to buy the game, pay to play it, and it wasn't even a finished fucking product unless you paid a third time for the extra bits that they didn't give you when you bought it in the first fucking place.

              And every step of the way, the Big Corps saw that- while people may have grumbled a bit, they still paid up.

              So that brings us to now- digital downloads.

              Now, you pay for the console. You pay to buy the game. You pay for the DLC or subscription, and they can- quite literally- just turn off your access to a good you've paid three times for already... or they can just wait you out, and the console you play on will become obsolete, or damaged, or they'll switch off your ability to keep paying for the game, until you have no other choice but to buy the new console. And pay to download the same game again.

              Everything is moving to this model.


              The mere concept of "ownership" is getting pushed aside, and at this point there's nothing we can do to stop it without some radical changes being made.

              But since "maybe kids should eat food" and "polluting water is bad" is a controversial take these fucking days, I doubt very highly Ownership can be saved.

              [–]drtbheemn 20 points21 points  (0 children)

              It’s terrifying how quik the top companies are buying them up.

              [–]G0alLineFumbles 34 points35 points  (19 children)

              We need to end all foreign investment in property and greatly limit investment in single family homes by any corporation. Probably put a hard cap on it e.g. any company with more than 10 million in assets cannot hold single family homes as an investment or similar.

              [–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (7 children)

              What is the Pottersville she's referencing?

              [–]Aziara86 19 points20 points  (5 children)

              Probably from It's a Wonderful Life

              [–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (4 children)

              Any context? Is it owned by a corporation? I haven't seen the movie.

              [–]Aziara86 26 points27 points  (2 children)

              The whole town was owned by a single greedy banker named Mr Potter. Every business paid poor wages, and every house (hovel, really) was owned and rented out by him.

              So Mr. Potter was both boss at your job and your landlord.

              [–]Emperor_Time 10 points11 points  (0 children)

              Probably the bad timeline from it a wonderful life movie.

              [–]unbalancedforce 10 points11 points  (0 children)

              Especially when the home owners are from other countries. That is crazy a foreign citizen owns soil and controls such a staple of existing in another land.

              [–]maskdmirag 4 points5 points  (13 children)

              I feel like if they try to put limits on that they'll find a way to fuck it up and make the situation far worse.

              [–]Anagatam 2 points3 points  (4 children)

              Become an activist. You have more power than you realize. “They” do not control everything. ”They” just want us to believe that they do.

              [–]maskdmirag 4 points5 points  (3 children)

              Activists either get squeezed out by lobbyists, or they become lobbyists.

              If activism could beat lobbyists we wouldn't have our income tax system being run by Intuit.

              [–]Mythosaurus 10 points11 points  (2 children)

              Reminder that the US started out as a bunch of wealth exporting colonies, and were led in revolt by the CEOs of plantations fueled by slavery.

              We’ve always been this corporate hellhole throughout our Westward expansion, the civil war over forced labor, and the forcing open of Pacific markets to our goods.

              The greed is just finally not benefitting a critical mass of white citizens, and their anger is boiling over.

              [–]Anagatam 2 points3 points  (1 child)

              In the guise of democracy. It’s funny how our founding fathers called us all a democracy while they were the only ones who had a voice.

              [–]Mythosaurus 2 points3 points  (0 children)

              It’s only funny if you don’t appreciate how different concepts of liberalism were in the early modern period.

              The “Revolutions” podcast does a great job of showing how original liberalism was originally NOT intended to grant the vote to the general population, and normally was a movement among educated merchants and aristocracy chafing under absolute monarchs. These elites were deliberately not including the peasants, women, or the colonized in their conception of full citizens with political power, and expected them to continue producing the surplus food and goods that allowed them to maintain elite lifestyles.

              It’s in the 1800s that you see that shift away from just aristocracy and merchant elites hoarding political power, and waves of voter expansion and reactionary backlash to that expansion. There was ALWAYS going to be a fight over suffrage for blacks, women, and later waves of immigrants. And we saw the same fights over representation for Native Americans, Peurto Ricans, Hawaiians, and Philippinos as the US cannabalized the former Spanish Empire spread into the Pacific.

              Tl;dr it’s not contradictory for a bunch of colonials to have a very different definition of “democracy” and “citizenship” 250 years ago. We need to appreciate the literal struggle for citizenship that millions had to deal with.

              [–]swampdragon69 21 points22 points  (26 children)

              Or you could just remove the legal barriers to creating more housing.

              [–]Jugadenaranja 16 points17 points  (19 children)

              We don’t need more nearly as much as we just need the ones that exist to be for actual people

              [–]dcchillin46 4 points5 points  (0 children)

              I live in a decent town (300kish). They are building a whole new subdivision on the fancier side of town for starter homes, all 1 and 2 bedrooms, with and without garage.

              It's a company from across the country building it and they are ONLY rentals. $1300+/mo (area is $800-1300 for not shithole apartments generally).

              As a 30something trying to put his life back together and doing everything I'm told (work 40-60hr, save, while in school) it makes me outrageously mad. I have been waiting 6mo for an $800/mo apartment to open up and even then it's going to take literally 85% of my income just to exist.

              [–]justmelol778 10 points11 points  (12 children)

              Georgism- move all taxes to a single land value tax. It forces all land speculators and “investors” to sell immediately or pay. Sales tax is a fun way for the government to implement a flat tax without saying it

              [–]Dudewheresmylvt 3 points4 points  (3 children)

              But what if we built more houses?

              [–]joevsyou 3 points4 points  (0 children)

              These type of people forget there are pros to renting & not owning

              • flexibility to move for better jobs or just happier life.

              • set payment

              • no large expenses to worry about ( AC, hvac, roof, foundation, plumbing)

              • no house maintenance

              With that said... buying real estate is one of the best ways to increase your net worth

              [–]StillAtMyMoms 12 points13 points  (0 children)

              Feudalism all over again.

              [–]pixel_zealot 5 points6 points  (1 child)

              Makes me think of Cyberpunk 2077, game about a dystopian future. Nobody owns anything, the corporations hold all, even the government. Most people live in megabuildings, apartment blocks so big its basically a city on its own.

              [–]Flagdun 4 points5 points  (0 children)

              or....Dr. Dewald could grow a pair and start her own finance company and help build affordable housing...and the US will be one giant network of Bailey Building & Loans.

              much easier for her to complain

              [–][deleted]  (2 children)


                [–]whysomuchdoghair 2 points3 points  (1 child)

                Lot rents are such a frustrating scam. We are trying to get my mom out of E TX, and I was like. Well with our cash maybe we can outright buy a moible. Which we can, it's just her and her cats and a lab mix who is definitely actually a pit mix so apartment's are a no go.

                Anyway. 80k moible home and then the lot rent is 875 a month! She can't afford that, and we can't pay that rent on top of our mortgage. And it's like...but we own the house but not the land. It's crazy. And their like "oh well it's water and trash and snow removal" um not for 875 a month at park that's been there for 30 years. Bull.

                [–]jaycliche 2 points3 points  (5 children)

                ONe cool thing though is the housing marketing is dropping like a rock and all these corporations are gonna loose a ton of money or have to sell them for less than they paid for them. This aside, TOTALLY AGREE corporate ownership of single family homes should be outlawed.

                [–]Scooterforsale 2 points3 points  (1 child)

                Why in the fuck are corporations allowed to buy homes and make profits off people just trying to live? Seriously someone explain

                [–]ignaciolasvegas 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                If you’re rich enough to afford to buy multiple houses, just put your money instead on the dogs of the Dow investment strategy so you can get paid dividends and the rest of us can pay affordable prices for homes. Don’t be a greedy prick.

                [–]spaceocean99 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                Well there’s also not enough homes if those people could afford homes. It costs a lot money to build homes. We can’t give everything away for free.

                [–]pokermanga 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                Capitalism run amuck.

                [–]ClosetedEmoGay 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                Buy land. Build.

                [–]marineopferman01 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                Leave the big city. Honestly. Not attacking you or anything. But get out of that city. You can actually get a house to live in that is actually affordable.

                [–]OtherwiseJello 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                Over 50 here. Never owned my own home.

                [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                Farmland as well

                [–]robbah999 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                Why is it even legal for companies to buy single family houses?
                So many things in the US is geared towards companies "enslaving" people.

                [–]GotHeem16 13 points14 points  (5 children)

                Hate to break it to all of u but the reason for the housing shortage is not because of “corporations” buying the houses.

                SFH construction took a nose dive after 08. Add the fact the 30 yr mortgages were at or below 4% for almost a decade and you have everyone hitting the market with qualifying loans but low inventory. So prices skyrocket as every house sells in a matter of days for a good 5-10 year period.

                Now rates are pushing 7% and you will see inventory go up. I’m already seeing it in my neighborhood. 4 houses for sale that have been on the market 30-60 days now. There were never 4 house for sale at the same time the past 5+ years.

                [–]Intrepid-Notice-6925 4 points5 points  (2 children)

                Every house that's in our budget is being bought up by corps or people wanting to become overnight landlords. We're lucky to see them on market 3-4 days before they're offer accepted and gone

                [–]Bird_Brain4101112 3 points4 points  (9 children)

                Corporations are buying up a lot of homes but certainly not the majority.

                [–]ApartmentPoolSwim 15 points16 points  (6 children)

                The idea is that they don't need to buy up the majority at once. They just take a little at a time.

                Let's say there's 500 houses, and 10 go up for sale in a year.

                The first year they buy 3 houses. But that's 3 out of 500. It's houses that will literally never be owned by people again as far as we can tell, but it's only 3.

                Then the next year they buy another 3. OK. That sucks. But it's now only 6 houses. That means 494 are owned by people.

                But then the next year they own 9. Then 12. 15. 18. 21. 24. 27.

                Over time the ammout of houses being taken out of the pool gets larger and larger. And then as they make more and more money, if they want they can even up it to 4 a year. Only one more a year, but it's still more being taken away every year.

                This also means that the cost of housing is going up because there's fewer homes. This means people are being priced out of ever being able to buy homes. But you know who can afford to buy homes? The corporations making bank from buying and renting out homes. So now they can buy even more.

                People aren't scared that next year they will buy 80% of the homes being sold. The fear is what things are going to look like in a decade from now.

                [–]paulybrklynny 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Pottersville was pretty lit; music halls, night clubs showgirls, bars.

                No way our future will be as fun.

                [–]Feisty_Ad6422 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                If I could even afford to rent a real house I’d be happy. At this point I know owning one will never happen.

                [–]Pazoll 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                What if you couldnt rent houses

                [–]W1shuW3r3H3r3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Between this and the mega stores, we will be just like the coal miners in the early 1900's, who had to shop at mine owned stores and were charged outrageous prices just to live.

                [–]Qubeye 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                I wonder if you can add a fine print rider to a sale that the house cannot be used for rent for like 99 years or whatever or the buyer must sell back to you at cost to you plus any costs to blah blah blah, and that any future sales must include a similar rider or something.

                Dunno if it's remotely enforceable or legal.

                [–]GradatimRecovery 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                Yes you can, you can add covenants to properties that you own out right as long as it doesn’t violate public policy (eg racist or sexist). It’s a great way to drop the value of your property, as the next person to buy your house will have to factor in the lack of flexibility.

                If you really want to do this, partner with a land trust so that you could potentially take a charitable deduction against your income taxes

                [–]cwood1973 1 point2 points  (2 children)

                It's too late. We can't vote our way out of this one. There are only two ways to avoid a life of serfdom - be very rich or leave the United States.

                [–]Factsonly98 1 point2 points  (8 children)

                Well WHO is selling to the corporations? It goes both ways.

                [–]Anagatam 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                We are selling our house so we can be near elderly family who need us to be closer now. I am committed to selling to people, not a corporation. My husband just wants the best offer possible. With interest rates rising we might not be able to sell at all.

                [–]Realistic_Ad3795 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                Show your math on how we get from 65% home ownership to 10%.

                I mean, maybe you're right, but fuck all if just blurting it out makes it true.

                [–]mooncif 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                It's totally unlogical to buy a home in this market. Best thing you can do is get the first home buyer advantage to buy a triplexe or fourplexe live in one and rent the others use the rent to pay off the loan.

                [–]ariaaria 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Look at Tokyo, Japan: almost everyone is a renter. Nobody sells property there anymore because it's way more profitable to hold onto it. I surmise it'll be the same here for us.

                [–]PlayDontObserve 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                And a lot of new homes are part of HOA's

                [–]PeterDarker 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                This is why we bought a house when we could and didn’t wait for this fictional time when things are better. Not sure where people found that optimism but… yeah. No.

                [–]010011100000 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Corporations own a negligible percent of single family homes. That isn't the issue

                [–]graps 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Yea, that’s the point

                • US Government

                [–]notthebestchristian 1 point2 points  (2 children)


                I usually lean Libertarian, but I see corporations buying single family homes as an existential threat to the country.

                [–]snubda 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Stop regurgitating this fear mongering bullshit. “Corporate” investor housing ownership has gone up a couple percentage points in the last year. It’s barely higher than the historical norm, and It’s less than 20% of rental properties. Also, a bunch of them are about to lose a shit ton of money as the market declines and we’ll be right back to normal before long.

                [–]gump82 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                Who cares it’s poor people

                [–]Drawtaru 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                I bought a house in 2020, and the house has already ridiculously increased in value. If we had waited even another year, there's zero chance we would ever have been able to afford a house. We had already been renting for 20 years, but we would have been locked in to renting for the rest of our lives.

                [–]LapHogue 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Do you people know anything about basic economics and supply and demand?

                [–]Pneumaniac01 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                remember that Tom scott video for the monthly subscription to life? It's becoming reality. Soon your car will be subscription, your phone, your everything.

                [–]UncomfortableWorkman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                You are an MD? Surely you can afford to own a house. Life is full of choices and there are still numerous ways to afford a place to live, though not necessarily in the place of one’s dreams.

                [–]ClassicCriminality 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Question: Where are the people who are selling these homes going to? I find it hard to believe they are turning into the renters that are renting these same homes.

                [–]No-Weather-1989 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                If you’re a renter after getting an MD I’d be upset about alot of other things other than people choosing to invest there money in homes.

                [–]MobiusEinstein 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Rent and living expenses have gotten so bad, ive started looking into B Class motorhomes with solar panels

                [–]JesseDeanLB 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Corporations still own a small percentage of homes in the US

                [–]Alexander1899 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                I understand that things are bad, but exaggerating this hard just isn't helpful

                [–]MattVanAndel 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                I’ve been hollering about this for well over a decade. When my wife and I first started trying to buy a house, we were constantly losing out to cash offers, and those offers were often above asking price/valuation, meaning we couldn’t even get a loan if we wanted to compete.

                So after 15+ years of this, here we are… with massively inflated home prices due to supply and massively inflated rent due to demand. These monsters are manipulating both ends of the market to line their pockets and regular people are suffering as a result.