• TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    So yeah, I need serious “profit” just to break even.

    That’s a contradiction in terms. To break even is by definition not a profit. To make a profit, you need a surplus after you minus expenses from revenue. If landlords were content to just break even, I wouldn’t necessarily have a problem with them. In fact, I think not-for-profit housing could go a long way in addressing the housing affordability crisis.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Didn’t word that well, agreed. But you need solid profit up front to backstop for emergencies and risk. I would be a one man, one house operation. I couldn’t spread the risk around like a corporate landlord with 100 or 1,000 properties.

      If landlords were content to just break even

      After paying on the property, maintaining and improving it, I deserve no profit for my 20-years of labor?

      Are you saying that workers should be content to merely break even for their labor? Your labor is worthy, but mine is not?