I don't get why it's not ok to steal food from a grocery store but it is ok to not pay rent. Both are basic necessities and in both cases you hurt someone else by not paying for service (food/shelter).
Most people see a vast moral difference between failing to pay a debt you owe and taking something that doesn't belong to you in the first place. If you broke into an unoccupied apartment and squatted there, that'd be at least as stealing food from a grocery store.
If an apartment is unoccupied, chances are it's used for speculation and/or short term rentals. If that's the case, I'd rank squatting better than stealing and failing to pay your rent. I'm sure others share this position, given posts like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22852570.
Those are both potentially morally acceptable. If you are on the verge of starving and have no money and no other source of food, it's ok to steal something from a grocery store. If you are on the verge of homelessness and have no money and no other source of shelter, it's ok to not pay your rent.
I'm sure there's a moral framework where it's never acceptable to hurt someone else when you could sacrifice yourself instead, but I don't think that's a particularly common school of thought. More often people will weigh two potential harms to make a decision, like "I can't pay my rent, but property taxes and foreclosures have been suspended during the pandemic, so my landlord will likely suffer less harm than I would if I became homeless."
Finally, "can't pay the rent" doesn't necessarily mean silently fail to mail a check. It might mean talking to the landlord about a payment plan, or frankly telling them you have no money and can't even afford food for the week. Landlords are humans, just like grocers who might give food to a starving person
If you're starving, stealing from the food delivery network is about the worst thing you could do about it. Robbing random strangers in the street would do less damage than victimizing the specific people you depend on.
People without incomes right now can probably afford food, even if they can't afford rent. The fact is that a significant fraction of society is in an impossible situation right now, through no fault of their own. And probably very few rentiers are in that group.
Very few rentiers is likely true. However, very few landlords are rentiers. The average investor owns 2 rental units [1]. And the vast majority of property investors have full time jobs and mortgages on their rental properties (I can't link directly to a source, but Buildium regularly conducts surveys to understand property investors).
To paint landlords as rentiers who can easily afford to go without rent or with greatly reduced rent is wrong. It mischaracterizes the problem in a way that will lead to bad solutions.
If there is to be rent reductions or forgiveness, there must also be reductions, aid or forgiveness on mortgages, property taxes and utilities. Somebody needs to pay for these things. Yes, profits will be reduced, but losses cannot be sustained for as long as social distancing measures are expected to last.
There is florist in the article that is introduced as someone who could pay rent from her savings. However, she has decided she would "rather conserve her money than pay bills now."
SpicyLemonZest|5 years ago
gruez|5 years ago
ngngngng|5 years ago
[deleted]
burkaman|5 years ago
I'm sure there's a moral framework where it's never acceptable to hurt someone else when you could sacrifice yourself instead, but I don't think that's a particularly common school of thought. More often people will weigh two potential harms to make a decision, like "I can't pay my rent, but property taxes and foreclosures have been suspended during the pandemic, so my landlord will likely suffer less harm than I would if I became homeless."
Finally, "can't pay the rent" doesn't necessarily mean silently fail to mail a check. It might mean talking to the landlord about a payment plan, or frankly telling them you have no money and can't even afford food for the week. Landlords are humans, just like grocers who might give food to a starving person
erik_seaberg|5 years ago
_bxg1|5 years ago
wilbo|5 years ago
To paint landlords as rentiers who can easily afford to go without rent or with greatly reduced rent is wrong. It mischaracterizes the problem in a way that will lead to bad solutions.
If there is to be rent reductions or forgiveness, there must also be reductions, aid or forgiveness on mortgages, property taxes and utilities. Somebody needs to pay for these things. Yes, profits will be reduced, but losses cannot be sustained for as long as social distancing measures are expected to last.
[1] https://www.huduser.gov/portal/pdredge/pdr-edge-frm-asst-sec...
antisthenes|5 years ago
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36190557
unknown|5 years ago
[deleted]
shard972|5 years ago
[deleted]
enraged_camel|5 years ago
flyingcircus3|5 years ago