Mortgage isn't the problem, most can still be in forebearance if it's needed. The problem is they still have to pay property taxes and maintain the property. Tenants can still sue landlords for not properly maintaining their property even if they're not paying rent.
Exactly, the poor families who work hard to buy another house & use the old one to rent out get screwed because the banksters & the rich buy them & rent them out again. It's making everyone poor.
@@protox4 If the same politicians who imposed the moratoriums were told property owners should be relieved of taxes for the duration, what do you think their answer would be?
Like when Trump latched onto that the incredibly small and shaky first hydroxychloroquine study and then hyped it - despite so many people who actually work with such studies saying, no, not good enough for “one of the greatest game changers in the history of medicine” tweet. What Trump did with hydroxychloroquine was like picking a random penny stock and declaring it the next Apple. The next study showed hydroxychloroquine did nothing good, and no one uses it for COVID…but Repubs needed “something,” so they grabbed junk science.
You can have a bad study without it being a govt. conspiracy (And the govt. actually seems pretty divided on the moratorium issue actually--they get more votes from renters, but more campaign $$$ from landlords and mortgage-holders). The problem with anti-government conspiracy theories is they lead people to reject perfectly good govt.-funded theories or science in general.
@@Itried20takennames Yet here we are post Trump, and the facts show HQN does work, as does ivermectin, the whole pandemic was a bunch of political fighting and lies by the dems that cost many lives. Now the dems are the least vaxed because they were told not to take the Trump vax…smh
A lot of "studies" are really just fancy marketing materials. The same thing is true of "expert witnesses" in court. If both sides are equally well-funded, they'll both pay for "studies," and the "studies" will come to opposite conclusions 99% of the time.
@@jantelliquawallace355 I don't sell watches. I originally picked the name watch collector, but it had already been taken so I just went with watch dealer 😂
my province was raiding churches and hutterite/amish compounds based on "case" numbers in March 2021 and then 4 months later said the PCR test is not reliable and they are discontinuing quarantine from a positive test unless the person has symptoms. pastors spent months in jail and everyone was just like well....we did the best we could.
Very Political...politics KILLS, so does government Policies many times. We are seeing this more than ever before. People that Know nothing about, making laws affecting peoples lives and causing Deaths.
"Trust only the science we tell you to". Anyone claiming counter points is not a true scientist. And if the science changes, like Lab Leak, then understand that never happened. We never said it was scientifically proven Lab Leak was false. Do not trust your lying eyes or your memory.
@Ryan Monaghan the science of climate change is a given.. The issue is when people take that science, poorly extrapolate, manipulate, misrepresent, and lie.. Climate change is definitely an issue.. but as a society we need to rationally discuss the cost/risk vs benefit analysis of interventions. With so much bias and disinformation.. it make it hard to discuss. Everyone has their own "facts" they use cement their bias.
Its not even real science. Their "science" is some random obscure paper that happens to align with their ideological beleifs, that have been P hacked to litteral shit and never even reproduced.
@Ryan Monaghan Climate change is not a problem. The seas aren't rising. The glaciers aren't retreating. The polar ice caps aren't melting. We don't have more extreme weather. We aren't getting more hurricanes. The polar bear population has gone from from about 5,000 to 35,000, and the U.S. has reduced its carbon emissions drastically largely by switching from leaded gasoline to unleaded gasoline in the 70's. A half degree warmer in the next century does not constitute an emergency in any way, shape or form.
It’s very telling that one of the researchers actually came out and said that the study hasn’t been peer reviewed or published, but they still wanted the numbers to influence policy. How can that not result in bad policy?
Why aren’t we outraged that the government was even allowed to do this in the first place? Compelling people to do certain things with their own property…. This almost seems like a violation of the 3rd amendment
I’m more outraged about this whole tyrannical movement than I thought possible. Stolen election, stolen freedom, fear, control etc. we are dealing with the biggest criminal narcissists ever.
@@dannygreen7473 Voting stopped mattering when Woodrow Wilson ran on a campaign of staying out of WW1, and probably before that. If you cannot enforce that the person follows through with the actions that they promised to do if you give them your vote, then your vote has no meaning.
"Low income or Credit impaired..." Carlin did a bit on this soft language. "They don't have a negative cashflow position, they're broke, they're f%^king BROKE"
@lmao this isn't a name I was a teenager and couldnt even get a job at mcdonalds during the pandemic. Im applying now, but at the time your delusional if you think the job market was even in a position to do anything.
@@honkhonk8009 depends on where euour from and what uou were looking to do and how much you care about your own well being. There are always jobs and things that been to be Done, but aren't always worth it. (I Found jobs during the pandemic, some weren't good and people dropped like flies, two were decent)
@lmao this isn't a name If you work 50 hours a week at minimum wage job in Los Angeles, you can maybe afford rent for a one-bedroom apartment, but not food, transportation, medical care, dentistry, or anything else. "Get a job" will often just keep you broke.
So they won’t provide the data for the study because it isn’t peer reviewed just a pre-work. But will do interviews and let people cite their work in court.
I think we are talking about this from the wrong angle. If the government wants to prevent evictions that is all well and good, but they should have done it through rental assistance, not through banning evictions. By banning evictions, they have inserted themselves into the lease agreement, so as far as I am concerned, they are responsible for any unpaid rent.
From day 1 landlords should have protested this by refusing to pay property tax on those properties on mass given how the state had essentially confiscated the property for their use without compensation.
The same people who told us a house was the "American dream" or said real estate was a good investment because "people will always need a place to live" are now saying you don't have to pay rent during a "pandemic"? What the heck! Why does the CDC, or any politician for that matter, have an opinion on rent? That's not their job
Who couldn't pay their rent due to the pandemic? If you lost your job you got and additional $2400 a month in unemployment for many months and now are still receiving $1200 a month in unemployment even though jobs are plentiful and giving incentives to new hires. If you were already on aid or a government worker you got 100% of your expected wage. If you were an essential worker most people saw a hazard pay interval in addition to their regular wage. All three of these groups received government stimulus checks.
@@rockymntnliberty only to have the govt they fought for attack them in 1786 at shays Rebellion and 1790s whiskey rebellion. No revolution has ever fixed anything. Ours was the Merchant aristocrats overthrowing the birth right of kings so they could monopolize their own power structure. We went from 1 king to a couple of Men behind the scenes running the country with anonymity. Nothing is ever fixed.
Modern statistics protocol: 1. Start with an ideological conclusion 2. Cherry pick data that supports said conclusion 3. Obfuscate data that doesn’t support the desired conclusion 4. Coordinate distribution of study with sympathetic media and academia 5. Label any questions as “misinformation“ Welcome to 2021
There's no profit or wealth transfer to be gained by promoting good health. That, and you know, we can't possibly fat shame people, even if their life depends on it.
Okay so let me get this straight. You halt evictions. Okay. A LOT of landlord count on that to pay the mortgage. Landlord gets behind on his mortgage. I think there was some protection for this as well. However. Say they do default on their mortgage because they couldn't replace the Non-paying tenants with Paying tenants. Now a landlord has lost an asset because they wouldn't get a job. Now???? The country is literally almost completely open. You can find a job and continue paying rent
A lot of lazy people would rather ride the wave of insanity. Unsuprisingly we live in an entitled generation though for those who are actually getting a better paying job after the massive employment strike that occured good on them but for those using it as an excuse to not work by saying we arent working till they pay more...when many jobs have started paying more. shame on them.
They should have required everyone to provide that they couldn’t pay their rent. That way you could help the very small number of people who were unable to pay their rent. From the freeloaders who were able to pay their rent. The majority of people not paying rent. Either continued working or were receiving stimulus money, regular unemployment plus an extra $300 a week. These people scammed the system and now the government is going to pay all their back rent without proof of need.
I am a scientist and I have worked for national labs and universities. Unfortunately, misrepresenting data and results is common place. Many 'researchers' believe telling the story that fits their agenda is more important to the actual findings. Massaging data to fit that agenda is important not only to their careers but the funding agency. Nobody really understands what you did to support your findings unless they take the time to reproduce your results, which never happens. You will never-ever find a negative result. Meaning that if a researcher proposes to find or prove x, the results always support their proposal and never report that their hypothesis was wrong no matter the facts.
I really hope that the science establishments can find ways to punish these unethical actors and prize scientists who stick to the truth. Science is really important to society and bad actors are slowly deligitimizing the whole institution.
I have a rental house that I didn't want. Bought for $67,000 in 2004, the value dropped to $32,000 in 2008. My wife and I could not afford to sell it, but we also couldn't stay, so we rented it out in 2012. The most recent tenants moved in in 2017. They immediately fell behind on rent, but we cared about them, so we lowered rent by $100 a month. It was the best we could do. We were losing money on the house, but they were a couple in their 60's raising a grandson on their own, so we wanted to help. We ignored late payments entirely, effectively loaning them thousands of dollars, to help. In 2019, we offered to sell them the house for $35,000 (the payoff amount), though the market value was back up to $48,000. We wanted to be kind. Then I found out this poor family was sitting on a $100,000+ property five minutes from my house. It was exactly the sort of property I have wanted to own my entire life, and I was paying this guy's rent almost every month. Then he showed up in a new SUV, while I'm driving a junker from the 90's and my wife has a decade old Nissan versa. Then we see his wife's new car. Then he brags about the pool he put in, at my house, without permission, while my kids would love a pool but I can't afford one. I'm fed up. I tell them they're out, then the rona hits. First the city stops evictions. Then the state. Then the fed. They stopped paying the instant they could get away with it. They applied for government assistance, which covered $6,500 back rent out of about $16,000 owed. We are still out thousands of dollars. They told us they had to quit their jobs because they feared for their lives back in February. They couldn't pay rent...but they still had their cars. Turns out, they were lying. Our tenants told friends of ours that they were shopping for a new house in June. When the moratorium was supposed to end in July, we told them they were out the instant we could evict them without going to jail and, surprise, they said they wanted to pay $40,000 in cash for our house! They even sent proof of funds to the lawyer we hired to evict them. As it happens, the 2021 value on that house is $83,000. Wonder why they want to take our 2019 offer now? They didn't pay rent for more than a year. They applied for tax payer funded bailouts on rent, and got them. They put us thousands in the hole. And they did it all while making payments on two new cars and sitting on at least $40,000 in cash and a $100,000 piece of land After Biden reinstated the moratorium, they cut off all contact again. They aren't responding to requests for July or August rent. I guess that $40,000 dissappeared? Or maybe they need it to build a house on that sweet piece of property they own. The system is broke AF. These folks are among the people screaming that eviction equals death. I know half a dozen other families like them. I was planning on investing in rental properties if I could pull it off. My wife and I can almost qualify for a business loan now, but it will never happen. Not after the government crapped all over property rights. I'm afraid to invest my life savings in a market that just got crushed to death by unconstitutional regulation. How may other potential landlords feel the same way? One housing crisis, comming right up...Dolts.
In all this, the leading causes of death are ignored. I saw no moratorium on junk food, corn syrup, fast food. All of which are directly linked to the deaths. Obesity, diabetes and heart disease are the problem. Stealing from property owners was never a solution. Only a way to hurt the little guy.
How are two high impact papers from last year still "awaiting peer review"? I've had papers held up 3-4 months before, but that's abnormally long even for low impact papers.
This is what happens when narrative becomes more important than the truth, just like how it is when we talk about police interactions with black Americans, the origins of Covid19, the potential efficacy of certain drugs for Covid19, the presence of systemic racism in the US, the extent of climate change, the efficacy of the Paris accords...and pretty much every issue of policy the Left advocates for.
Hedge fund manager as the spokesman for opposing this policy? That makes this totally unsharable to people who would actually need to be convinced. Also a big reason for this policy is simply humanitarianism. You can argue that it was done poorly with other big problems but people simply losing their housing because of something that they had no control over doesn't sit well with most people.
I got evicted one time in my 20s and it was the push I needed to become a successful adult. On account of not wanting to be homeless again, I got IT certification training, then a good job as a computer technician, then started my own company which has been in operation for 11 years now.
Cancel rent, what could go wrong? Wouldn't some landlords go bankrupt and then need housing assistance themselves? Why would anyone ever build another housing unit in anticipation of letting someone live there for free? Of course no one would so all living quarters would need to be bought outright so all the people that couldn't afford to buy would not find a place to live. So the government would probably build living quarters but then make their rent non-cancellable. Haven't we seen this before in the old Soviet Union. Can you imagine how bad government provided housing would be and how poorly maintained it would be?
Mean while small landlords got crushed, and tenants are now seeing 25% increases in rent to pay for the cost of the moratorium. Once again, government ends up hurting the people they say they want to help.
$100 billion of that $4 trillion spent on “something” could have been used to build low-income housing. At least it was the government carrying the burden of the collecting rent from high-risk renters instead of small homeowners.
But they had to protect the airlines that used all their profits in past few years in stock buybacks instead of saving for a ranny day. Keep you priorities straight airlines are more inportant than the poor. Besides building more homes whould lower the price of existing housing lowering the meddle class biggest investment
And ifso, it would appear that the same man-made modern ambiguity of foreign plague Statistics aren't so dire afterall.Realities of mass public morbidity suddenly made obsolete by charts & illustrations by the latter standards.It seems by design & example,such Variants are not that serious after all.So why not altogether Ditch the Masks, Lift Quarantine, then Fully open up for Employment & Entertainment.Wouldnt be much of a difference,Weve already been in Pre-Zombie 101 training,so to speak.Living alongside a Horde of Public Tent City Homelessness.Only this time it would be alot worse bcs the poverty is common place in any society. But the full on brunt of mass evictions only perpetuates the true beginning of the end of Western civilization.And ergo ipso facto, lifting the Moratorium could possibly create a backlash of serious major public health problems of megalithic proportions.Perhaps alot worse than the Black Plague of the 15century ,that of which also leapt out of China.
Ok I’m confused: I thought the point of halting evictions was to prevent people from being homeless during a period when everything was closed and where some people were struggling financially.
That is the current reasoning. When states implemented eviction moratoriums initially back in March of 2020, and later with the CDCs moratorium, the reason government gave was that they were needed to prevent the spread of COVID. Without any actual data or study to support that narrative. Now that COVD appears to be winding down, government invented a new excuse to keep them. The real reason has always been to cover up a depression and to try and keep up the appearance of a healthy economy.
The analyst is severely low balling the number of evictions that the moratorium has prevented. In LA County alone there are 300,000 renters behind on rent, averaging $5,300 each. That is just one county. NYC has 400,000 renters behind owing a total of $2 billion. And he thinks that only a few thousand people have been saved from eviction? I would like to see HIS reasoning on how he came up with that number. Once again, a political media claims one side is lying at the same time that it presents lies itself.
I rent the upper store of my house. If renters could just stop paying rent and I would have to still carry all costs by myself, I would lose my house to the bank after a year or so. I always wanted to live in the US. I'm so glad I never moved there. Your country has gone crazy!
Once the moratoriums end, the real crisis will begin. A large number of owners of rental homes who have been hurt by this "pandemic" will sell their properties, especially with the high demand due to lack of housing supply for sale. You'll also see quite a few apartments selling to developers who will turn them into condos and sell them. This will help with the supply in homes for sale, but will dump that shortage into the rental market. Combine that with the large number of evicted who will not be able to find rentals due to bankruptcies and other negative rental credit due to not paying rent, and you'll have a homeless issue like never before. It's going to get very, very ugly.
Some were already living at the edge of their means, "house poor", and with the Enhanced Unemployment being less than their standard paycheck, they still couldn't afford the rent. Others, of which there are far too many, simply saw the moratoriums as an opportunity to get a free ride and spend the money elsewhere, or to "stick it to the man".
The more the government pours into housing subsidies, rent control, eviction moratoriums, etc - the higher housing prices will get. But for a lot of homeowners, that’s kinda what they want.
"For sure" evictions open space for overcrowded living situations. This would lead to zero-sum gain except that some landlords will no longer want to rent leading to less supply and therefore rent increases. This policy had "spiral out of control" built-in. America's wealth seems to increase 4% to 5% each year. How much can we deflate the currency by printing tons of it and tax away business profit before we reduce overall wealth? Both will happen if the government becomes America's landlord. We all know government is very inefficient. Using the 4% to 5% margin, how can the government possibly do anything without negative results?
I am curious on seeing studies on if the governments rental assistance program is helping? My hunch is that those big companies, who have the manpower, connections and expertise, have no problems getting assistance while the mom and pop landlords have the most difficulty,. I heard of some horror stories in my state where tenants hve abused the system, leaving landlords holding the bill.
I have two tenants who between them owe me over $10k. There is help available in my state and county but neither of them is very motivated to go get me that money.
Surprise surprise I am neither a renter nor a landlord and I expect there will be a high percentage of those who owe back rent that find ways to never pay it.
I had 6 tenants, 5 left after 3 months, I still have to pay the real estate taxes as if I was at full occupancy. Still had to pay electric and oil as if the building was full. I am selling my building which my family has owned for 40 years, bye, bye NYC
The written decision cited the fact the moratorium was ending soon so the Supremes were to lazy or negligent to strike it down immediately even though they acknowledged the CDC should not have imposed it.
If 2 or 3 people move from one home to another, and they wear a mask, then there is no connection to being at higher risk to covid. They would be out in public for other reasons anyway. The only people that I have compassion for, with regards to covid, are the ones that had a death in the family or suffered severe illness, or lost their job due to covid layoff while caring for someone disabled. All others have no excuses, including me.
I would absolutely believe that moratorium states had more deaths - but I don't think it has to do with the moratoriums. I think it has to do with the fact that states that do that are almost inevitably woke as hell and therefore inclined to impose an array of policies which cause higher deaths, such ashigh-caliber lockdowns which caused more deaths due to a lack of heard immunity.
7:45 -- Hold on, why would you want to compare data between states? That introduces a lot of confounding factors, including enormous differences in governance and climate.
Also population density or present epidemic situation. And why assume someone would take up the vacated apartments when people are loosing jobs? The studies likely have a lot of confounding factors against them by their very nature, but this looks deliberately obtuse.
That's what they do all the time in public health studies. They compare states to states, then they attempt to explain the possible reasons for the differences in the results. Of course you account for the compounding factors, but for public health to be studied on a general scale across continent for 300 million people it becomes nearly impossible to account for them all. That's why the US doesn't give the CDC power over the entire population, because they can only give general policy recommendations for the US population that may or may not work for everyone everywhere. Public health is a state level issue because something that works in Idaho might not work in Texas. And in some states they delegate all that power to individual counties. But for the CDC to be remotely effective they need to analyze and give general recommendations for what state and counties might ought to do because in general they have found it to work.
@@dallascopp4798 -- I don't understand your reasoning. _"They compare states to states, then they attempt to explain the possible reasons for the differences in the results."_ Comparing some states to others doesn't necessitate pooling the data. They could have looked at the calculated the difference in moratoriums within each state, and then taken a weighted average of the results. _"Of course you account for the compounding factors, but for public health to be studied on a general scale across continent for 300 million people it becomes nearly impossible to account for them all."_ Right, and because each confounding factor reduces the validity of the results, why allow any more confounding factors than necessary given the constraints of the research budget? I wouldn't have taken any extra resources to keep the data separate. _"That's why the US doesn't give the CDC power over the entire population, because they can only give general policy recommendations for the US population that may or may not work for everyone everywhere."_ I don't see how this justifies pooling states' data. Making recommendations for Montana based partly on California's data is _less_ likely to be successful than only going by Montana's data.
I find it interesting that during a time of economic boom where employers are begging for workers and even offering hiring bonuses some how these people cant find a job or a way to pay their rent. For 250 years people have faced eviction if they did not pay their rent in this country, but some how in the year 2021 after hundreds of years people are going to now die if they are evicted or are forced to pay their rent. For the love of god this nation is in decay and has lost its mind
A protester was holding a sign "housing is a basic human right". That is on it's face preposterous, and she clearly had no idea what a human right is. If you can not "build" your own house, that means that someone else must build it. If that is the case, you are saying that you have a right to that persons labor, which is essentially slavery.
This is why PHds have lost a lot of respect in my mind. I am, more or less, completely unimpressed by people with PhDs and don't consider them any more intelligent, clever, self-aware, or fair-minded than the average person.
We need to come up with other housing options besides just traditional renting from a private landlord or buying a house. I feel like that's a big part of the problem. There need to be more affordable things that people can buy and less regulations on where they can put them and what they can do with them. Maybe more tiny houses and trailers are the answer. I don't know, but being under a landlord's thumb sucks and it's no way to live long term. We've become to dependent on them. But buying a traditional house is fast getting to the point where it's only for rich people. So what are you going to do?
but cities can't tax that. If everyone lived in trailers; 1) the same thing would happen with trailers and scalpers 2) the city wouldn't be able to tax them every year, and being they are mobile makes chasing that income difficult and less enticing. They are incentivized to keep housing prices bloated to justify the tax income, as well as strict bylaws in place against self-reliance and living in trailers. Someone has to foot that bill, the homeowners can't afford to anymore. Blame the municipality making 60k+ per job with highschool education and the unions, not the landlords, government has become more enticing than private sector work...there's something very wrong with that, it was typically designed as government work was the setup tool to a career not the career. Everyone's getting a piece from the biggest pie which is real estate. It's why I think realtors are just as cancerous on the economy as day traders and banks. They are literally parasitic in nature, with bloated regulation to justify themselves (created by themselves).
@@zyralove4540 Yeah, but my point is, those options need to be encouraged more. There are way to many barriers against those kinds of things, put up by bearuocrats.
@@Melissa0774 Why not encourage people to work hard, improve their skillsets, and be financially responsible so that they can better afford to rent or buy? I know several people in their 20's who own homes, and they didn't have help from family. Unfortunately, we've turned to telling people they're perfect as they are, and that there's no need to improve or grow. We've told them it's perfectly fine for them to be obese, though we know it risks their health (even moreso with covid) and causes health insurance rates for everyone to skyrocket. We've told them they deserve a "living wage" to dunk fries or flip burgers, when that's a perfectly suitable job for a teen still living at home. We've told people that they're entitled to this and to that, not that they can earn it. Want to put out low effort and have few responsibilities? Buy a beat up trailer for $2500 and rent a small corner of someone's property to park it on. You're free to do that too.
I mean the government had money appropriated for rent and given to the states, its just the rules for deploying the money are difficult since they don't want people who don't actually need it to get it. Getting evicted though with a whole family that sort of situation is not as good for society. Once people are evicted they rarely recover.
I don't feel bad for anyone who gets evicted. I lost my in a nice office job last year an took any job I could get construction, landscaping, road repair, and roofing. So I don't feel bad on anyone who's going to get kicked out
8:10 to 9:10 data isn't meaningful because the states that didn't have moratoriums could be sparsely populated and the states that did could be very densely populated if you don't control for that all you have is lines on a sheet that don't mean anything
Folks are getting all of that government money which is supposed to be used to pay back-rent. Are they? That is a study I would enjoy reading. It is more likely that they are bailing on the landlords and buying crap which they don't need. Also, there appears to be a lot of folks driving vehicles which they can barely afford; they paid the downpayment but are bailing on the notes until the repo man shows up.
Sadly correct. No matter what anyone thinks they own, when governments exist, they are always the super-owner of all things and can decide whether or not to take your stuff. Individual rights are nice ideas on paper, but government is about raw power.
On the bright side, all those rental houses hitting the market, and apartments converted to condos and sold, will help with housing supply for those who haven't ruined their credit with evictions and bankruptcies. Maybe the excess renters can live in the brand new cars they bought with their "extra" unemployment money and money they saved by not paying rent. Well, at least until their fancy cars are reposessed.
Yes, but they spent the money instead of paying rent... Why pay if you can't get kicked out? I personally lost thousands in rent to the point I had to sell this year... Which I think is the point...
You'd think right? But then when the govt. tells them they can't be kicked out for not paying rent the "renters" are going to spend their huge UE benefits on clothes, phones, game consoles, TVs, vacations, etc.
If you make more on unemployment benefits than wages it’s a sign wages are way too low. They have only been stagnant since the 1970s! The cost of everything has increased except wages. You can thank Reagan for that. He introduced the neoliberal policies that are killing the nation today. Don’t be naive. Toxic individualism mixed with American exceptionalism and end stage capitalism and you have our current system.
Eviction moratoriums hurt small landlords who bought multifamily home as part of retirement plan and rental income help paying for mortgage and expenses. It was a perfect storm to lift up deadbeats while oppressing mom and pop landlords.
There are people I talk to that tell me that landlords everywhere are greedy. But they don't stop to think that there are so many middle class families who are landlords part time. Everyone thinks it's some scrooge type landlord but si many are middle class trying to gain passive income
OK I can do some math for you. This is supposed to prevent overcrowding? You have 100 people and 100 rentals. One person leaves or gets evicted than someone else moves in. Does not change anything. You treat landlords like this and half will dissapear. Now you have 100 people and 50 rentals. Brillant! This is the effect of the moratorium. Rents will skyrocket.
You have not been paying attention. Housing as a spec investment is driving up the costs of home ownership and rentals. We have companies that come in and offer 30-50% above asking price and they pay cash. They are interested in turning America into a nation of renters. Never mind that homeownership is the main path to inter generational wealth and is a core American dream belief. Those who stand to gain are now trying to push this “young people want to rent so they can be flexible” instead of telling the truth.
@@navyreviewer We'll likely see prices recede in the home sales market, as landlords who have rentals as income/retirement will have learned a hard lesson and will put those rental homes up for sale. We'll likely also see many small and medium sized apartment complexes turned into condos and sold for the same reason. While this will help with the short supply of homes for sale, it will absolutely destroy the supply of rentals. Add this to the renters who will now have an eviction and/or bankruptcy on their records not being able to find anyone who will rent to them, and we're going to see a huge homeless crisis. The only real question is, how far will our new socialist overlords overstep their authority to use this crisis to gain even more control?
To be honest, if you dig into the data on masks, you discover the exact same thing. All the studies supposedly demonstrating the effectiveness of masks are a result of 1) cherry-picking data, or 2) based upon "models" which the authors just accept as true axiomatically and make no attempt to justify empirically
Very few homeless died. This despite bad nutrition and drug use. Likely helped by high sun exposure for good vitamin d levels and largely avoiding enclosed spaces.
@@stevengerendash7522 Seeing that homeless bodies were not piled in the streets made me realize that the lockdowns weren't about health, they were about control.
The study also fails to mention what happens when millions of people have nothing to do and don't have to pay rent, and then think they can get away with literally anything. Where do you think that "stimulus" money goes instead? How many drug OD's, how many assaults, how many properties literally destroyed? And then whatt happens when housing providers se out, or just pull properties off the market? Rents go up, housing comes in short supply and homelessness increases. Everything you sought to gain is lost and then some.
Politician tells Fed Agency to obtain a study to support the policy he is pushing. Agency reaches into back pocket and discovers a study that shows exactly what the politician wanted.
It’s so odd that there’s a narrative about all landlords being these rich tycoons that laugh while sitting on a pile of money. Honestly when this video stated that there are landlords of color and landlords who depend on the income their rental properties make, I honestly had to do a double take. Thank you for the video :)
Because there are many types of landlords, from Wallstreet firms to your local mom and pop landlord. After 2008 Wallstreet got away from mortgages and got into rental properties. People whould not have this notion if we kicked Wallstreet out of the rental market
The (probably strategic) flaw in your reasoning is proposing the only objective of the moratorium was to reduce COVID infections and deaths, when that reason was secondary at best. The primary reason we froze evictions was so that people who could not work through no fault of their own *would not end up on the street by the hundreds of thousands*. And it worked beautifully for that.
You do not have the right to live. Living is a choice. You have the right to not be killed, but nobody has any obligation whatsoever to provide you the standard of living that you want.
You have been deceived. The government should be for the people vs corporations. Republican or Democrat……same thing. Just different sides of the same coin. No taxation without representation! I don’t feel represented. Do you? It’s disgusting how the American people have been deceived into thinking they deserve so little especially when the ruling class (the 1% which is really less than 1% as this ruling class consists of less than 200 families. If you are a CEO or a janitor you are both working people. You are the 99%. See they use race, religion, class, age, anything to divide.
@@atomicstyle7344 I'm glad you responded to the comment. What disturbed me was the comment " we have no right to live." However, there is much truth in their statement. None of us were guaranteed protection in our Mother's womb but are in danger depending on whom conceived us. As an American, this is truly getting scary to many of us. 🇺🇸
I'm a elderly small-scale landlord, and during the moratorium I had a quarter of my tenants not paying any rent for about six months. Thank God my mortgages were paid off, or I would have lost everything I had worked my whole life to build up. I feel so sorry for other landlords who didn't have the maneuver room that I did.
This was a great video, but I think the public health reason wasn't the *only* reason for the eviction ban. It was also to try to keep people from becoming homeless due to something that was not their fault at all. That still stands, the money just needs to get out!
Peer reviewed only means other researchers similar to the ones who put the paper together have written an evaluation of the paper. The Duke study hasn't been put up for review, AND the authors promoted their work before any reviews could be done, which will alter the researchers who would consider reviewing the study. It's a garbage paper
@@RepublicConstitution experts are more likely to be correct than some random person on the internet, but they can be wrong. I'm pretty sure the disproving was also done by an expert, right?
See it was great and all but then the people who OWN the rental property wont be able to pay their bills and then they will have to sell their properties and the tenants will get removed anyways.
Deaths or not: Evicting someone who, through no fault of their own, can't pay rent (it isn't like that person wouldn't want to pay the rent on time!) is still quite cold hearted ("But I require that money to live!" - Yes, in some cases that may be true, but frankly this pandemic is something that hit us all hard, so yeah we should stick together and help each other out! Landlords should also get help, be it by freezing loans they might have taken out to buy the property or by giving them money to put food on the table!)
@@Canbechangedtwiceeveryfourteen I think he illustrated that life is quite complex, but the morality of the issue is simple. People shouldnt be evicted during a pandemic. Landlords who don't provide any value to society will have to adjust. Investments have risks.
Why would anyone feel it necessary to draw a link between public health and evictions? Could it be that they truly care about public health or do they feel like people should have a place to live and not pay for it? If the latter were the case I may not agree with it but I’d at least respect the honesty.
Because you can't be healthy if you don't a roof over your head. Specially if you live up north. In Minnesota being homeless during the winter is almost a death sentence. Imagine survinig outside for a 3 months when 25°f is a nice and warm day 0 is normal and -25°f is a bad day. Why do you think there so few homelles in MN.
people lost their jobs because the goverment sees they were not allowed to work. Then they could not afford rent. Without the eviction freeze they whould have been evicted. If they got evicted you whould have a decent percent of the population of the USA. Maybe up to 10% homeless, ARMED, jobless, literally with nothing to loose out on the streets. Blaming the government, resentful of the government, their ex-boss, ex-company, ex-landlord, etc. That is not something you want in any society
@@jcgw2 I don’t mean to suggest that if a person has a legitimate reason to not pay rent they should be evicted. Furthermore landlords can and should take it on a case by case basis. However, if a person rents a place to live they have a responsibility to pay their rent. The misconception in my humble opinion is that any agency within government control cares about our health. I don’t think they care about mine and I don’t expect them to. I don’t remember anyone talking about not having to pay my mortgage due to not having the ability to work. Banks were allowed to work with people on it. I was lucky though and I managed. So my thinking leads me to believe that if I can manage then others can too. It may not be easy but it can be done.
People don't understand that a rent moratorium "doesn't" mean you don't pay rent. It's just piling up until its lifted then you owe current ongoing rent again and the balance held up. Once all the moratoriums are lifted it will be catastrophic
Practically, it means you can skip paying rent, spend the money, get evicted, get sued for what you owe, and the landlord gets basically nothing because you don't have any money for them to take. Or, if the landlord isn't willing to go through that process, or doesn't expect the courts to even side with them, they just settle for a tiny fraction, or even write it off in exchange for that "renter" going away.
@@Br3ttM I have never been in a position where I struggled to pay rent or bills because I can keep a sound budget and balance my check book not ever having a credit card as a baseline. However I have had to help others pay their rent and other necessities at times. I have absolutely "ZERO" sympathy for any landlord or a property management company as a rule. Now they have just an inkling of an idea what the tenant that's just bearly making ends meet endures just trying to make it from pay check to pay check. Property owners can rot in eternal screaming suffering while residing in the lowest pit of greed hell flame where they belong for their indifference and lack of vision. However for the mom and pop landlord just trying to their pay bills just the same I have some empathy for, but even them not so much. Just saying. 🙄
If renters can't be evicted then homeowners shouldn't have to pay the mortgage or lose their homes to the banks either.
But many are. A lot of smaller landowners renting their property have had to sell their property to avoid foreclosure.
Mortgage isn't the problem, most can still be in forebearance if it's needed. The problem is they still have to pay property taxes and maintain the property. Tenants can still sue landlords for not properly maintaining their property even if they're not paying rent.
Exactly, the poor families who work hard to buy another house & use the old one to rent out get screwed because the banksters & the rich buy them & rent them out again. It's making everyone poor.
@lmao this isn't a name got any receipts on that? The top 10% pay 60% of all income tax. Facts matter.
@@protox4 If the same politicians who imposed the moratoriums were told property owners should be relieved of taxes for the duration, what do you think their answer would be?
I am embarrassed by how easily this country caved to nonsensical restrictions.
@@chaist94 American Mentality....
The media told them to, the corporations followed, everyone was fearmongered to obey.
@@chaist94 with how we view people and fans merely as "numbers".....I'd have to say yes.
Keep your shirt on Hess bestest we're only talking about the eviction moratorium here
For money
Government pays for studies, researchers provide studies that meet government expectations. Never saw that coming...
Like when Trump latched onto that the incredibly small and shaky first hydroxychloroquine study and then hyped it - despite so many people who actually work with such studies saying, no, not good enough for “one of the greatest game changers in the history of medicine” tweet. What Trump did with hydroxychloroquine was like picking a random penny stock and declaring it the next Apple. The next study showed hydroxychloroquine did nothing good, and no one uses it for COVID…but Repubs needed “something,” so they grabbed junk science.
You can have a bad study without it being a govt. conspiracy (And the govt. actually seems pretty divided on the moratorium issue actually--they get more votes from renters, but more campaign $$$ from landlords and mortgage-holders). The problem with anti-government conspiracy theories is they lead people to reject perfectly good govt.-funded theories or science in general.
@@Itried20takennames Yet here we are post Trump, and the facts show HQN does work, as does ivermectin, the whole pandemic was a bunch of political fighting and lies by the dems that cost many lives. Now the dems are the least vaxed because they were told not to take the Trump vax…smh
A lot of "studies" are really just fancy marketing materials. The same thing is true of "expert witnesses" in court.
If both sides are equally well-funded, they'll both pay for "studies," and the "studies" will come to opposite conclusions 99% of the time.
A study on studies found most were wrong. It’s on this channel
They sold their dignity, integrity, and professionalism for political gain and a bit of fame.
And a federal grant
they can't sell something they never had
-Literally every single politician since...ever. Except Ron Paul. He's cool.
what kinda watches you hustle? You think the next Tissot model will have a function to detect propaganda?
@@jantelliquawallace355 I don't sell watches. I originally picked the name watch collector, but it had already been taken so I just went with watch dealer 😂
That lady literally said we haven’t checked the numbers yet for accuracy but you can use to make key decisions that impact people lives.
my province was raiding churches and hutterite/amish compounds based on "case" numbers in March 2021 and then 4 months later said the PCR test is not reliable and they are discontinuing quarantine from a positive test unless the person has symptoms. pastors spent months in jail and everyone was just like well....we did the best we could.
@@rustyscrapper Another day in the land of just makin' Crap up as they go!
Very Political...politics KILLS, so does government Policies many times. We are seeing this more than ever before. People that Know nothing about, making laws affecting peoples lives and causing Deaths.
😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😅
Well done video. These are the folks saying “trust the science”, but what they really mean is “trust us”.
"Trust only the science we tell you to". Anyone claiming counter points is not a true scientist. And if the science changes, like Lab Leak, then understand that never happened. We never said it was scientifically proven Lab Leak was false. Do not trust your lying eyes or your memory.
@Ryan Monaghan the science of climate change is a given..
The issue is when people take that science, poorly extrapolate, manipulate, misrepresent, and lie..
Climate change is definitely an issue.. but as a society we need to rationally discuss the cost/risk vs benefit analysis of interventions.
With so much bias and disinformation.. it make it hard to discuss. Everyone has their own "facts" they use cement their bias.
@Ryan Monaghan 11 years? I heard 7!!
Its not even real science. Their "science" is some random obscure paper that happens to align with their ideological beleifs, that have been P hacked to litteral shit and never even reproduced.
@Ryan Monaghan Climate change is not a problem. The seas aren't rising. The glaciers aren't retreating. The polar ice caps aren't melting. We don't have more extreme weather. We aren't getting more hurricanes. The polar bear population has gone from from about 5,000 to 35,000, and the U.S. has reduced its carbon emissions drastically largely by switching from leaded gasoline to unleaded gasoline in the 70's. A half degree warmer in the next century does not constitute an emergency in any way, shape or form.
The Federal and State Governments need to compensate landlords for the impositions against their property rights.
It’s all a part of the plan to take private property rights away over time.
You say the fed and state govt but it is actually the taxpayer, Like me and you. Why should we have to pay for these squatters?
It’s very telling that one of the researchers actually came out and said that the study hasn’t been peer reviewed or published, but they still wanted the numbers to influence policy. How can that not result in bad policy?
And the media outlets they chose to report their findings already agreed with their conclusion. Therefore, they will not be challenged.
Why aren’t we outraged that the government was even allowed to do this in the first place? Compelling people to do certain things with their own property…. This almost seems like a violation of the 3rd amendment
ACA...
I’m more outraged about this whole tyrannical movement than I thought possible. Stolen election, stolen freedom, fear, control etc. we are dealing with the biggest criminal narcissists ever.
@@this_epic_name What a bunch of communists. Vote them out.
Welcome to the communist states of America.
@@dannygreen7473 Voting stopped mattering when Woodrow Wilson ran on a campaign of staying out of WW1, and probably before that. If you cannot enforce that the person follows through with the actions that they promised to do if you give them your vote, then your vote has no meaning.
9 most frightening words in the English Language, " I'm from the government and I'm here to help".- Ronald Reagan
Reagan increased the size of government.
@@jimlovesgina The size of government went down as a % of GDP under Reagan. It's better than the presidents we've had for the last 20 years.
@@jimlovesgina the government grew under Reagan but slower than it has under other presidents
Reagan was an idiot who created irrational fear of government. In fact 73% of Americans had a favorable opinion of their government prior to Reagan.
"Low income or Credit impaired..." Carlin did a bit on this soft language. "They don't have a negative cashflow position, they're broke, they're f%^king BROKE"
@lmao this isn't a name I was a teenager and couldnt even get a job at mcdonalds during the pandemic. Im applying now, but at the time your delusional if you think the job market was even in a position to do anything.
@@honkhonk8009 depends on where euour from and what uou were looking to do and how much you care about your own well being. There are always jobs and things that been to be Done, but aren't always worth it.
(I Found jobs during the pandemic, some weren't good and people dropped like flies, two were decent)
A recent video I saw was titled "people experiencing homelessness". It's wierd how it almost sounds like it's the homeless persons choice to do this.
@lmao this isn't a name If you work 50 hours a week at minimum wage job in Los Angeles, you can maybe afford rent for a one-bedroom apartment, but not food, transportation, medical care, dentistry, or anything else.
"Get a job" will often just keep you broke.
So they won’t provide the data for the study because it isn’t peer reviewed just a pre-work. But will do interviews and let people cite their work in court.
I think we are talking about this from the wrong angle. If the government wants to prevent evictions that is all well and good, but they should have done it through rental assistance, not through banning evictions. By banning evictions, they have inserted themselves into the lease agreement, so as far as I am concerned, they are responsible for any unpaid rent.
Any government assistance is stolen from others.
@@jimlovesgina Yes. It's still preferable to tax the country as a whole than to screw over a certain class of business
From day 1 landlords should have protested this by refusing to pay property tax on those properties on mass given how the state had essentially confiscated the property for their use without compensation.
The same people who told us a house was the "American dream" or said real estate was a good investment because "people will always need a place to live" are now saying you don't have to pay rent during a "pandemic"? What the heck! Why does the CDC, or any politician for that matter, have an opinion on rent? That's not their job
Who couldn't pay their rent due to the pandemic? If you lost your job you got and additional $2400 a month in unemployment for many months and now are still receiving $1200 a month in unemployment even though jobs are plentiful and giving incentives to new hires. If you were already on aid or a government worker you got 100% of your expected wage. If you were an essential worker most people saw a hazard pay interval in addition to their regular wage. All three of these groups received government stimulus checks.
I feel like I’m living in an Ayn Rand novel.
I wish. In an Ayn Rand novel, there would be an embraced solution and a way out.
@@gregthebaritone
There is a solution and a way out. Just like the one that started at Lexington and Concord.
@@rockymntnliberty only to have the govt they fought for attack them in 1786 at shays Rebellion and 1790s whiskey rebellion. No revolution has ever fixed anything. Ours was the Merchant aristocrats overthrowing the birth right of kings so they could monopolize their own power structure. We went from 1 king to a couple of Men behind the scenes running the country with anonymity. Nothing is ever fixed.
Arab spring in Tunisia (and nowhere else) worked
Modern statistics protocol:
1. Start with an ideological conclusion
2. Cherry pick data that supports said conclusion
3. Obfuscate data that doesn’t support the desired conclusion
4. Coordinate distribution of study with sympathetic media and academia
5. Label any questions as “misinformation“
Welcome to 2021
In a country with over 40% obesity rate. Proper Diet and exercise will save more people from covid then stopping evictions
There's no profit or wealth transfer to be gained by promoting good health. That, and you know, we can't possibly fat shame people, even if their life depends on it.
cancel rent = owner selling house.........no house = no rent.....brilliant!!!
Okay so let me get this straight. You halt evictions. Okay. A LOT of landlord count on that to pay the mortgage. Landlord gets behind on his mortgage. I think there was some protection for this as well. However. Say they do default on their mortgage because they couldn't replace the Non-paying tenants with Paying tenants. Now a landlord has lost an asset because they wouldn't get a job. Now???? The country is literally almost completely open. You can find a job and continue paying rent
A lot of lazy people would rather ride the wave of insanity. Unsuprisingly we live in an entitled generation though for those who are actually getting a better paying job after the massive employment strike that occured good on them but for those using it as an excuse to not work by saying we arent working till they pay more...when many jobs have started paying more. shame on them.
They should have required everyone to provide that they couldn’t pay their rent. That way you could help the very small number of people who were unable to pay their rent. From the freeloaders who were able to pay their rent. The majority of people not paying rent. Either continued working or were receiving stimulus money, regular unemployment plus an extra $300 a week. These people scammed the system and now the government is going to pay all their back rent without proof of need.
I am a scientist and I have worked for national labs and universities. Unfortunately, misrepresenting data and results is common place. Many 'researchers' believe telling the story that fits their agenda is more important to the actual findings. Massaging data to fit that agenda is important not only to their careers but the funding agency. Nobody really understands what you did to support your findings unless they take the time to reproduce your results, which never happens. You will never-ever find a negative result. Meaning that if a researcher proposes to find or prove x, the results always support their proposal and never report that their hypothesis was wrong no matter the facts.
I really hope that the science establishments can find ways to punish these unethical actors and prize scientists who stick to the truth. Science is really important to society and bad actors are slowly deligitimizing the whole institution.
I have a rental house that I didn't want. Bought for $67,000 in 2004, the value dropped to $32,000 in 2008. My wife and I could not afford to sell it, but we also couldn't stay, so we rented it out in 2012.
The most recent tenants moved in in 2017. They immediately fell behind on rent, but we cared about them, so we lowered rent by $100 a month. It was the best we could do. We were losing money on the house, but they were a couple in their 60's raising a grandson on their own, so we wanted to help.
We ignored late payments entirely, effectively loaning them thousands of dollars, to help. In 2019, we offered to sell them the house for $35,000 (the payoff amount), though the market value was back up to $48,000. We wanted to be kind.
Then I found out this poor family was sitting on a $100,000+ property five minutes from my house. It was exactly the sort of property I have wanted to own my entire life, and I was paying this guy's rent almost every month.
Then he showed up in a new SUV, while I'm driving a junker from the 90's and my wife has a decade old Nissan versa. Then we see his wife's new car. Then he brags about the pool he put in, at my house, without permission, while my kids would love a pool but I can't afford one.
I'm fed up. I tell them they're out, then the rona hits. First the city stops evictions. Then the state. Then the fed. They stopped paying the instant they could get away with it. They applied for government assistance, which covered $6,500 back rent out of about $16,000 owed. We are still out thousands of dollars.
They told us they had to quit their jobs because they feared for their lives back in February. They couldn't pay rent...but they still had their cars. Turns out, they were lying.
Our tenants told friends of ours that they were shopping for a new house in June.
When the moratorium was supposed to end in July, we told them they were out the instant we could evict them without going to jail and, surprise, they said they wanted to pay $40,000 in cash for our house! They even sent proof of funds to the lawyer we hired to evict them. As it happens, the 2021 value on that house is $83,000. Wonder why they want to take our 2019 offer now?
They didn't pay rent for more than a year. They applied for tax payer funded bailouts on rent, and got them. They put us thousands in the hole. And they did it all while making payments on two new cars and sitting on at least $40,000 in cash and a $100,000 piece of land
After Biden reinstated the moratorium, they cut off all contact again. They aren't responding to requests for July or August rent. I guess that $40,000 dissappeared? Or maybe they need it to build a house on that sweet piece of property they own.
The system is broke AF. These folks are among the people screaming that eviction equals death. I know half a dozen other families like them. I was planning on investing in rental properties if I could pull it off. My wife and I can almost qualify for a business loan now, but it will never happen. Not after the government crapped all over property rights.
I'm afraid to invest my life savings in a market that just got crushed to death by unconstitutional regulation. How may other potential landlords feel the same way? One housing crisis, comming right up...Dolts.
I don’t know about everyone else but I’m really sick and tired about “experts”
In all this, the leading causes of death are ignored. I saw no moratorium on junk food, corn syrup, fast food. All of which are directly linked to the deaths.
Obesity, diabetes and heart disease are the problem. Stealing from property owners was never a solution. Only a way to hurt the little guy.
How are two high impact papers from last year still "awaiting peer review"? I've had papers held up 3-4 months before, but that's abnormally long even for low impact papers.
They need to be sued , period . Inflicting financial penalty when a fraud is exposed will quickly shut down such behaviour and practises .
This is what happens when narrative becomes more important than the truth, just like how it is when we talk about police interactions with black Americans, the origins of Covid19, the potential efficacy of certain drugs for Covid19, the presence of systemic racism in the US, the extent of climate change, the efficacy of the Paris accords...and pretty much every issue of policy the Left advocates for.
Hedge fund manager as the spokesman for opposing this policy? That makes this totally unsharable to people who would actually need to be convinced. Also a big reason for this policy is simply humanitarianism. You can argue that it was done poorly with other big problems but people simply losing their housing because of something that they had no control over doesn't sit well with most people.
I got evicted one time in my 20s and it was the push I needed to become a successful adult. On account of not wanting to be homeless again, I got IT certification training, then a good job as a computer technician, then started my own company which has been in operation for 11 years now.
Cancel rent, what could go wrong? Wouldn't some landlords go bankrupt and then need housing assistance themselves? Why would anyone ever build another housing unit in anticipation of letting someone live there for free? Of course no one would so all living quarters would need to be bought outright so all the people that couldn't afford to buy would not find a place to live. So the government would probably build living quarters but then make their rent non-cancellable. Haven't we seen this before in the old Soviet Union. Can you imagine how bad government provided housing would be and how poorly maintained it would be?
the main issue here, is people should never have been forced to stay home and been able to go to work
Mean while small landlords got crushed, and tenants are now seeing 25% increases in rent to pay for the cost of the moratorium.
Once again, government ends up hurting the people they say they want to help.
We still pay for rent though. They just enabled squatters.
$100 billion of that $4 trillion spent on “something” could have been used to build low-income housing. At least it was the government carrying the burden of the collecting rent from high-risk renters instead of small homeowners.
But they had to protect the airlines that used all their profits in past few years in stock buybacks instead of saving for a ranny day. Keep you priorities straight airlines are more inportant than the poor. Besides building more homes whould lower the price of existing housing lowering the meddle class biggest investment
We sent millions for gender studies in Pakistan
That shit was in there
"Studies show" is the new prefix for people who's lying to you.
Thats not new.
... unless it's something that agrees with your ideology. Then it's legitimate studies.
No moratorium on property taxes.
And millions of bums took advantage of the situation and small landlords are suffering. KICK THEM ALL OUT ALREADY.
And ifso, it would appear that the same man-made modern ambiguity of foreign plague Statistics aren't so dire afterall.Realities of mass public morbidity suddenly made obsolete by charts & illustrations by the latter standards.It seems by design & example,such Variants are not that serious after all.So why not altogether Ditch the Masks, Lift Quarantine, then Fully open up for Employment & Entertainment.Wouldnt be much of a difference,Weve already been in Pre-Zombie 101 training,so to speak.Living alongside a Horde of Public Tent City Homelessness.Only this time it would be alot worse bcs the poverty is common place in any society. But the full on brunt of mass evictions only perpetuates the true beginning of the end of Western civilization.And ergo ipso facto, lifting the Moratorium could possibly create a backlash of serious major public health problems of megalithic proportions.Perhaps alot worse than the Black Plague of the 15century ,that of which also leapt out of China.
Ok I’m confused: I thought the point of halting evictions was to prevent people from being homeless during a period when everything was closed and where some people were struggling financially.
Unfortunately it is abused, and the landlord goes bankrupt, making him homeless.
That is the current reasoning. When states implemented eviction moratoriums initially back in March of 2020, and later with the CDCs moratorium, the reason government gave was that they were needed to prevent the spread of COVID. Without any actual data or study to support that narrative. Now that COVD appears to be winding down, government invented a new excuse to keep them. The real reason has always been to cover up a depression and to try and keep up the appearance of a healthy economy.
It was. This is a strawman argument by a bunch of libertarian douchebags.
@@lynxminx4 Agreed.
Same here. Commenter here seem to think it's safer and healthier to be homeless during a pandemic. I don't understand the lack of compassion.
The analyst is severely low balling the number of evictions that the moratorium has prevented. In LA County alone there are 300,000 renters behind on rent, averaging $5,300 each. That is just one county.
NYC has 400,000 renters behind owing a total of $2 billion.
And he thinks that only a few thousand people have been saved from eviction? I would like to see HIS reasoning on how he came up with that number.
Once again, a political media claims one side is lying at the same time that it presents lies itself.
The CDC has no authority to make or enforce any laws. The eviction moratorium is an unlawful order.
I rent the upper store of my house. If renters could just stop paying rent and I would have to still carry all costs by myself, I would lose my house to the bank after a year or so. I always wanted to live in the US. I'm so glad I never moved there. Your country has gone crazy!
It’s not gone crazy It’s been crazy I agree with u
Once the moratoriums end, the real crisis will begin. A large number of owners of rental homes who have been hurt by this "pandemic" will sell their properties, especially with the high demand due to lack of housing supply for sale. You'll also see quite a few apartments selling to developers who will turn them into condos and sell them. This will help with the supply in homes for sale, but will dump that shortage into the rental market. Combine that with the large number of evicted who will not be able to find rentals due to bankruptcies and other negative rental credit due to not paying rent, and you'll have a homeless issue like never before. It's going to get very, very ugly.
Riddle me this Batman. If the gov't was paying everyone who was laid off Expanded Unemployment, Why is anyone behind on their rent?
Because unemployment wasn't the same amount as my job paid me. Lol pretty simple.
Some were already living at the edge of their means, "house poor", and with the Enhanced Unemployment being less than their standard paycheck, they still couldn't afford the rent. Others, of which there are far too many, simply saw the moratoriums as an opportunity to get a free ride and spend the money elsewhere, or to "stick it to the man".
If eviction is death, why you refused to pay a rent?
The more the government pours into housing subsidies, rent control, eviction moratoriums, etc - the higher housing prices will get. But for a lot of homeowners, that’s kinda what they want.
"For sure" evictions open space for overcrowded living situations. This would lead to zero-sum gain except that some landlords will no longer want to rent leading to less supply and therefore rent increases. This policy had "spiral out of control" built-in. America's wealth seems to increase 4% to 5% each year. How much can we deflate the currency by printing tons of it and tax away business profit before we reduce overall wealth? Both will happen if the government becomes America's landlord. We all know government is very inefficient. Using the 4% to 5% margin, how can the government possibly do anything without negative results?
I am curious on seeing studies on if the governments rental assistance program is helping? My hunch is that those big companies, who have the manpower, connections and expertise, have no problems getting assistance while the mom and pop landlords have the most difficulty,. I heard of some horror stories in my state where tenants hve abused the system, leaving landlords holding the bill.
I have two tenants who between them owe me over $10k. There is help available in my state and county but neither of them is very motivated to go get me that money.
Surprise surprise I am neither a renter nor a landlord and I expect there will be a high percentage of those who owe back rent that find ways to never pay it.
I don’t understand forcing a single class of businesses to carry everyone else. This is illegal taxation of property owners.
Im blown away at how in depth every analysis is. This was a truly great video, and I doubt I could find this content anywhere else. Just wow
I had 6 tenants, 5 left after 3 months, I still have to pay the real estate taxes as if I was at full occupancy. Still had to pay electric and oil as if the building was full. I am selling my building which my family has owned for 40 years, bye, bye NYC
CDC should never have this authority, How did the Supreme Court uphold this?
The written decision cited the fact the moratorium was ending soon so the Supremes were to lazy or negligent to strike it down immediately even though they acknowledged the CDC should not have imposed it.
Yeah. My eyebrows went up when they said, "The CDC issued ban." Wh. Wha? What?? The CDC has that power?
If 2 or 3 people move from one home to another, and they wear a mask, then there is no connection to being at higher risk to covid. They would be out in public for other reasons anyway. The only people that I have compassion for, with regards to covid, are the ones that had a death in the family or suffered severe illness, or lost their job due to covid layoff while caring for someone disabled. All others have no excuses, including me.
Did anyone expect the Government to tell the truth?
Unfortunately, large swaths of people can't seem to imagine that they would.
I would absolutely believe that moratorium states had more deaths - but I don't think it has to do with the moratoriums. I think it has to do with the fact that states that do that are almost inevitably woke as hell and therefore inclined to impose an array of policies which cause higher deaths, such ashigh-caliber lockdowns which caused more deaths due to a lack of heard immunity.
Interesting. When I was a renter I avoided eviction by paying the rent!
Reminds me of the phony advertising line "9 out of 10 doctors recommend Brand X"
7:45 -- Hold on, why would you want to compare data between states? That introduces a lot of confounding factors, including enormous differences in governance and climate.
Also population density or present epidemic situation. And why assume someone would take up the vacated apartments when people are loosing jobs? The studies likely have a lot of confounding factors against them by their very nature, but this looks deliberately obtuse.
That's what they do all the time in public health studies. They compare states to states, then they attempt to explain the possible reasons for the differences in the results. Of course you account for the compounding factors, but for public health to be studied on a general scale across continent for 300 million people it becomes nearly impossible to account for them all. That's why the US doesn't give the CDC power over the entire population, because they can only give general policy recommendations for the US population that may or may not work for everyone everywhere. Public health is a state level issue because something that works in Idaho might not work in Texas. And in some states they delegate all that power to individual counties. But for the CDC to be remotely effective they need to analyze and give general recommendations for what state and counties might ought to do because in general they have found it to work.
@@dallascopp4798 -- I don't understand your reasoning.
_"They compare states to states, then they attempt to explain the possible reasons for the differences in the results."_
Comparing some states to others doesn't necessitate pooling the data. They could have looked at the calculated the difference in moratoriums within each state, and then taken a weighted average of the results.
_"Of course you account for the compounding factors, but for public health to be studied on a general scale across continent for 300 million people it becomes nearly impossible to account for them all."_
Right, and because each confounding factor reduces the validity of the results, why allow any more confounding factors than necessary given the constraints of the research budget? I wouldn't have taken any extra resources to keep the data separate.
_"That's why the US doesn't give the CDC power over the entire population, because they can only give general policy recommendations for the US population that may or may not work for everyone everywhere."_
I don't see how this justifies pooling states' data. Making recommendations for Montana based partly on California's data is _less_ likely to be successful than only going by Montana's data.
I find it interesting that during a time of economic boom where employers are begging for workers and even offering hiring bonuses some how these people cant find a job or a way to pay their rent. For 250 years people have faced eviction if they did not pay their rent in this country, but some how in the year 2021 after hundreds of years people are going to now die if they are evicted or are forced to pay their rent. For the love of god this nation is in decay and has lost its mind
A protester was holding a sign "housing is a basic human right". That is on it's face preposterous, and she clearly had no idea what a human right is. If you can not "build" your own house, that means that someone else must build it. If that is the case, you are saying that you have a right to that persons labor, which is essentially slavery.
This is why PHds have lost a lot of respect in my mind. I am, more or less, completely unimpressed by people with PhDs and don't consider them any more intelligent, clever, self-aware, or fair-minded than the average person.
In fact they are often markedly less so. Their specialisation robs them of the wisdom and initiative to discover valid conclusions
PhD just stands for piled higher and deeper
We need to come up with other housing options besides just traditional renting from a private landlord or buying a house. I feel like that's a big part of the problem. There need to be more affordable things that people can buy and less regulations on where they can put them and what they can do with them. Maybe more tiny houses and trailers are the answer. I don't know, but being under a landlord's thumb sucks and it's no way to live long term. We've become to dependent on them. But buying a traditional house is fast getting to the point where it's only for rich people. So what are you going to do?
but cities can't tax that. If everyone lived in trailers;
1) the same thing would happen with trailers and scalpers
2) the city wouldn't be able to tax them every year, and being they are mobile makes chasing that income difficult and less enticing.
They are incentivized to keep housing prices bloated to justify the tax income, as well as strict bylaws in place against self-reliance and living in trailers. Someone has to foot that bill, the homeowners can't afford to anymore.
Blame the municipality making 60k+ per job with highschool education and the unions, not the landlords, government has become more enticing than private sector work...there's something very wrong with that, it was typically designed as government work was the setup tool to a career not the career.
Everyone's getting a piece from the biggest pie which is real estate. It's why I think realtors are just as cancerous on the economy as day traders and banks. They are literally parasitic in nature, with bloated regulation to justify themselves (created by themselves).
There are and have always been other options though, it’s just becoming more known. Especially with the tiny homes and rvs.
@@zyralove4540 Yeah, but my point is, those options need to be encouraged more. There are way to many barriers against those kinds of things, put up by bearuocrats.
@@Melissa0774 Why not encourage people to work hard, improve their skillsets, and be financially responsible so that they can better afford to rent or buy? I know several people in their 20's who own homes, and they didn't have help from family. Unfortunately, we've turned to telling people they're perfect as they are, and that there's no need to improve or grow. We've told them it's perfectly fine for them to be obese, though we know it risks their health (even moreso with covid) and causes health insurance rates for everyone to skyrocket. We've told them they deserve a "living wage" to dunk fries or flip burgers, when that's a perfectly suitable job for a teen still living at home. We've told people that they're entitled to this and to that, not that they can earn it. Want to put out low effort and have few responsibilities? Buy a beat up trailer for $2500 and rent a small corner of someone's property to park it on. You're free to do that too.
I mean the government had money appropriated for rent and given to the states, its just the rules for deploying the money are difficult since they don't want people who don't actually need it to get it. Getting evicted though with a whole family that sort of situation is not as good for society. Once people are evicted they rarely recover.
Short synopsis: the narrative needed reinforcement. So some “scientists” made sh*t up.
I don't feel bad for anyone who gets evicted. I lost my in a nice office job last year an took any job I could get construction, landscaping, road repair, and roofing. So I don't feel bad on anyone who's going to get kicked out
This posted presentation is the REASON I subscribe to this channel.
8:10 to 9:10 data isn't meaningful because the states that didn't have moratoriums could be sparsely populated and the states that did could be very densely populated if you don't control for that all you have is lines on a sheet that don't mean anything
And you'd also have to control for the effects of every other rule governments put in place in response to the virus.
Folks are getting all of that government money which is supposed to be used to pay back-rent. Are they? That is a study I would enjoy reading. It is more likely that they are bailing on the landlords and buying crap which they don't need. Also, there appears to be a lot of folks driving vehicles which they can barely afford; they paid the downpayment but are bailing on the notes until the repo man shows up.
That’s not recent. That’s kinda always been a thing. Keeping up with the Jones’s.
Can't think of any reason the federal government would want to price landlords out of their own properties...
The government giveth and the government taketh away.
Sadly correct. No matter what anyone thinks they own, when governments exist, they are always the super-owner of all things and can decide whether or not to take your stuff. Individual rights are nice ideas on paper, but government is about raw power.
@@RepublicConstitution like when you pay off your house and you think you own it but then you don't pay taxes and they take it from you.
@@zg-it That's just one example, but yes. They've auctioned off the houses of widows over tiny tax debts of under a hundred bucks. Sick
And taketh and taketh and taketh
It will then be shocking news in a few years that the housing rental market has shrank to historic lows.
On the bright side, all those rental houses hitting the market, and apartments converted to condos and sold, will help with housing supply for those who haven't ruined their credit with evictions and bankruptcies. Maybe the excess renters can live in the brand new cars they bought with their "extra" unemployment money and money they saved by not paying rent. Well, at least until their fancy cars are reposessed.
People who are paid to stay home, not having to pay for their lodging, is another recipe for disaster. The only outcome? depression and crime.
You cannot cancel rent unless every housing unit is owned by the government. That will not end well.
Was the whole point of the huge UE benefits so that people COULD STILL pay their rent??
Yes, but they spent the money instead of paying rent... Why pay if you can't get kicked out? I personally lost thousands in rent to the point I had to sell this year... Which I think is the point...
You'd think right? But then when the govt. tells them they can't be kicked out for not paying rent the "renters" are going to spend their huge UE benefits on clothes, phones, game consoles, TVs, vacations, etc.
I paid. $1400/month. Unemployment was $1800. I barely made it.
If you make more on unemployment benefits than wages it’s a sign wages are way too low. They have only been stagnant since the 1970s! The cost of everything has increased except wages. You can thank Reagan for that. He introduced the neoliberal policies that are killing the nation today.
Don’t be naive. Toxic individualism mixed with American exceptionalism and end stage capitalism and you have our current system.
One of the very few things government should really do is protect property rights.
Eviction moratoriums hurt small landlords who bought multifamily home as part of retirement plan and rental income help paying for mortgage and expenses. It was a perfect storm to lift up deadbeats while oppressing mom and pop landlords.
There are people I talk to that tell me that landlords everywhere are greedy. But they don't stop to think that there are so many middle class families who are landlords part time. Everyone thinks it's some scrooge type landlord but si many are middle class trying to gain passive income
They had access to funds IF they reported their income and paid taxes. Covid-19 is not the cause of homelessness.
OK I can do some math for you. This is supposed to prevent overcrowding? You have 100 people and 100 rentals. One person leaves or gets evicted than someone else moves in. Does not change anything. You treat landlords like this and half will dissapear. Now you have 100 people and 50 rentals. Brillant! This is the effect of the moratorium. Rents will skyrocket.
You have not been paying attention. Housing as a spec investment is driving up the costs of home ownership and rentals.
We have companies that come in and offer 30-50% above asking price and they pay cash. They are interested in turning America into a nation of renters. Never mind that homeownership is the main path to inter generational wealth and is a core American dream belief. Those who stand to gain are now trying to push this “young people want to rent so they can be flexible” instead of telling the truth.
We will be seeing the impacts of this eviction moratorium in a dysfunctional home market over the next decade.
I think we'll see a sharp snap back.
@@navyreviewer We'll likely see prices recede in the home sales market, as landlords who have rentals as income/retirement will have learned a hard lesson and will put those rental homes up for sale. We'll likely also see many small and medium sized apartment complexes turned into condos and sold for the same reason. While this will help with the short supply of homes for sale, it will absolutely destroy the supply of rentals. Add this to the renters who will now have an eviction and/or bankruptcy on their records not being able to find anyone who will rent to them, and we're going to see a huge homeless crisis. The only real question is, how far will our new socialist overlords overstep their authority to use this crisis to gain even more control?
CDC is supposed to be about science - too bad that isn’t how they operate because they are political appointees.
To be honest, if you dig into the data on masks, you discover the exact same thing. All the studies supposedly demonstrating the effectiveness of masks are a result of 1) cherry-picking data, or 2) based upon "models" which the authors just accept as true axiomatically and make no attempt to justify empirically
CDC HALTED? CDC? who elected them?
Seeing that homeless people did not all die, I think we know if eviction moratoriums helped at all.
Very few homeless died. This despite bad nutrition and drug use. Likely helped by high sun exposure for good vitamin d levels and largely avoiding enclosed spaces.
@@stevengerendash7522 Seeing that homeless bodies were not piled in the streets made me realize that the lockdowns weren't about health, they were about control.
I noticed the same thing. The homeless actually did pretty good covid wise. Who knows why? Maybe they smell bad and stay 6 feet away from each other.
@@jeffshackelford539 Not in the tent cities I've seen.
I've been doing charity on Skid Row throughout the pandemic. A LOT of homeless have died of covid.
The study also fails to mention what happens when millions of people have nothing to do and don't have to pay rent, and then think they can get away with literally anything. Where do you think that "stimulus" money goes instead? How many drug OD's, how many assaults, how many properties literally destroyed? And then whatt happens when housing providers se out, or just pull properties off the market? Rents go up, housing comes in short supply and homelessness increases. Everything you sought to gain is lost and then some.
What part of “the communists have taken over academia” do people have trouble understanding?
And all the lost souls,zombified bodies,& brain-drained minds of the socialist students & their socio-psychopathic, fascist-communist faculty.
Politician tells Fed Agency to obtain a study to support the policy he is pushing. Agency reaches into back pocket and discovers a study that shows exactly what the politician wanted.
rentoid oppression of landchads and landstaceys must end now
#endlandphobia
Since when did evictions become more important than foreclosures caused by not being able to evict?
It’s so odd that there’s a narrative about all landlords being these rich tycoons that laugh while sitting on a pile of money. Honestly when this video stated that there are landlords of color and landlords who depend on the income their rental properties make, I honestly had to do a double take. Thank you for the video :)
Because there are many types of landlords, from Wallstreet firms to your local mom and pop landlord. After 2008 Wallstreet got away from mortgages and got into rental properties. People whould not have this notion if we kicked Wallstreet out of the rental market
The (probably strategic) flaw in your reasoning is proposing the only objective of the moratorium was to reduce COVID infections and deaths, when that reason was secondary at best. The primary reason we froze evictions was so that people who could not work through no fault of their own *would not end up on the street by the hundreds of thousands*. And it worked beautifully for that.
You do not have the right to live. Living is a choice. You have the right to not be killed, but nobody has any obligation whatsoever to provide you the standard of living that you want.
You have been deceived. The government should be for the people vs corporations. Republican or Democrat……same thing. Just different sides of the same coin.
No taxation without representation! I don’t feel represented. Do you? It’s disgusting how the American people have been deceived into thinking they deserve so little especially when the ruling class (the 1% which is really less than 1% as this ruling class consists of less than 200 families.
If you are a CEO or a janitor you are both working people. You are the 99%. See they use race, religion, class, age, anything to divide.
@@atomicstyle7344 I'm glad you responded to the comment. What disturbed me was the comment " we have no right to live." However, there is much truth in their statement. None of us were guaranteed protection in our Mother's womb but are in danger depending on whom conceived us. As an American, this is truly getting scary to many of us. 🇺🇸
I'm a elderly small-scale landlord, and during the moratorium I had a quarter of my tenants not paying any rent for about six months. Thank God my mortgages were paid off, or I would have lost everything I had worked my whole life to build up. I feel so sorry for other landlords who didn't have the maneuver room that I did.
17 dislikes from people that feel they shouldn't have pay rent!
This was a great video, but I think the public health reason wasn't the *only* reason for the eviction ban. It was also to try to keep people from becoming homeless due to something that was not their fault at all. That still stands, the money just needs to get out!
Believe all study that have been peer reviewed. Yep that is about right.
Correct. Experts are always right. Worship professors who hate America. Studies are never wrong or biased 😜
Peer reviewed only means other researchers similar to the ones who put the paper together have written an evaluation of the paper. The Duke study hasn't been put up for review, AND the authors promoted their work before any reviews could be done, which will alter the researchers who would consider reviewing the study.
It's a garbage paper
@@chrischeehan2423 98% of studies show that people believe studies with results they like to agree with.
@@RepublicConstitution experts are more likely to be correct than some random person on the internet, but they can be wrong. I'm pretty sure the disproving was also done by an expert, right?
@@RepublicConstitution also, just because someone "hates america" doesn't mean their opinion is wrong or anything
See it was great and all but then the people who OWN the rental property wont be able to pay their bills and then they will have to sell their properties and the tenants will get removed anyways.
Deaths or not: Evicting someone who, through no fault of their own, can't pay rent (it isn't like that person wouldn't want to pay the rent on time!) is still quite cold hearted ("But I require that money to live!" - Yes, in some cases that may be true, but frankly this pandemic is something that hit us all hard, so yeah we should stick together and help each other out! Landlords should also get help, be it by freezing loans they might have taken out to buy the property or by giving them money to put food on the table!)
I’m glad life is so simple for you 🤦🏼♂️
@@Canbechangedtwiceeveryfourteen I think he illustrated that life is quite complex, but the morality of the issue is simple. People shouldnt be evicted during a pandemic. Landlords who don't provide any value to society will have to adjust. Investments have risks.
Why would anyone feel it necessary to draw a link between public health and evictions? Could it be that they truly care about public health or do they feel like people should have a place to live and not pay for it? If the latter were the case I may not agree with it but I’d at least respect the honesty.
Because you can't be healthy if you don't a roof over your head. Specially if you live up north. In Minnesota being homeless during the winter is almost a death sentence. Imagine survinig outside for a 3 months when 25°f is a nice and warm day 0 is normal and -25°f is a bad day. Why do you think there so few homelles in MN.
people lost their jobs because the goverment sees they were not allowed to work. Then they could not afford rent. Without the eviction freeze they whould have been evicted. If they got evicted you whould have a decent percent of the population of the USA. Maybe up to 10% homeless, ARMED, jobless, literally with nothing to loose out on the streets. Blaming the government, resentful of the government, their ex-boss, ex-company, ex-landlord, etc. That is not something you want in any society
@@jcgw2 I don’t mean to suggest that if a person has a legitimate reason to not pay rent they should be evicted. Furthermore landlords can and should take it on a case by case basis. However, if a person rents a place to live they have a responsibility to pay their rent. The misconception in my humble opinion is that any agency within government control cares about our health. I don’t think they care about mine and I don’t expect them to. I don’t remember anyone talking about not having to pay my mortgage due to not having the ability to work. Banks were allowed to work with people on it. I was lucky though and I managed. So my thinking leads me to believe that if I can manage then others can too. It may not be easy but it can be done.
People don't understand that a rent moratorium "doesn't" mean you don't pay rent. It's just piling up until its lifted then you owe current ongoing rent again and the balance held up. Once all the moratoriums are lifted it will be catastrophic
Practically, it means you can skip paying rent, spend the money, get evicted, get sued for what you owe, and the landlord gets basically nothing because you don't have any money for them to take. Or, if the landlord isn't willing to go through that process, or doesn't expect the courts to even side with them, they just settle for a tiny fraction, or even write it off in exchange for that "renter" going away.
@@Br3ttM I have never been in a position where I struggled to pay rent or bills because I can keep a sound budget and balance my check book not ever having a credit card as a baseline. However I have had to help others pay their rent and other necessities at times. I have absolutely "ZERO" sympathy for any landlord or a property management company as a rule. Now they have just an inkling of an idea what the tenant that's just bearly making ends meet endures just trying to make it from pay check to pay check. Property owners can rot in eternal screaming suffering while residing in the lowest pit of greed hell flame where they belong for their indifference and lack of vision. However for the mom and pop landlord just trying to their pay bills just the same I have some empathy for, but even them not so much. Just saying. 🙄
you really can convince americans of anything. 2.5 k people think we shouldn't have moratoriums? jesus wept for yall.