[rizoma_dev]

That's why I said if the tenant has been there for a sufficient time. If they have covered the unit's cost, plus maintenance, they have effectively paid for all the owner's expenses. Shouldn't it be enough to effectively own the property they actually live in?

[carom]

No, they took on zero risk to be in that position.

If my tenants lose their jobs they get six months free rent while I go through the eviction process. If I lose my job and can't get another I have to sell my property for a six figure loss.

I can make this property a single family home or I can make it available to other people as housing that they can't afford to buy outright. I don't understand the landlord hate. They can pool money, form an LLC, and buy a property if they want a tennant in commons situation. They can take on the risk and do the work.

[rizoma_dev]

There's no sense in arguing about it if you're a landlord, you have a monetary interest in the housing market staying this way and your relationship with your tenants is inherently adversarial