Heck, there’s no reason the renters should be excluded from the “free rent”
fad that the “homeowners” have been participating in for at least the past year or two.

Why shouldn’t renters negotiate down their rents? That’s what separates renters from owners: flexibility. When rents are going down, renters should negotiate lower rent. Most landlords certainly don’t hesitate to raise rents if area rents are going up, right?

Truth be told, the last thing we need in California are more “investors” who are looking to get rich in real estate. We need more committed, normal, qualified homeowners who have a personal stake in the well-being of our communities and our state.

Another potential threat to landlords/investors is the elimination of Prop 13 for investment properties and second homes. I doubt anyone will be able to overturn Prop 13 protection for primary residences (and I would NEVER want to see it), but there is no reason taxpayers should be subsidizing profits for landlords/investors. With the state and municipal budgets the way they are, the elimination of Prop 13 protection for investment properties is a definite possibility in the near future, IMHO, as it should be.

Heck, there’s no reason the renters should be excluded from the “free rent”
fad that the “homeowners” have been participating in for at least the past year or two.

Why shouldn’t renters negotiate down their rents? That’s what separates renters from owners: flexibility. When rents are going down, renters should negotiate lower rent. Most landlords certainly don’t hesitate to raise rents if area rents are going up, right?

Truth be told, the last thing we need in California are more “investors” who are looking to get rich in real estate. We need more committed, normal, qualified homeowners who have a personal stake in the well-being of our communities and our state.

Another potential threat to landlords/investors is the elimination of Prop 13 for investment properties and second homes. I doubt anyone will be able to overturn Prop 13 protection for primary residences (and I would NEVER want to see it), but there is no reason taxpayers should be subsidizing profits for landlords/investors. With the state and municipal budgets the way they are, the elimination of Prop 13 protection for investment properties is a definite possibility in the near future, IMHO, as it should be.

Heck, there’s no reason the renters should be excluded from the “free rent”
fad that the “homeowners” have been participating in for at least the past year or two.

Why shouldn’t renters negotiate down their rents? That’s what separates renters from owners: flexibility. When rents are going down, renters should negotiate lower rent. Most landlords certainly don’t hesitate to raise rents if area rents are going up, right?

Truth be told, the last thing we need in California are more “investors” who are looking to get rich in real estate. We need more committed, normal, qualified homeowners who have a personal stake in the well-being of our communities and our state.

Another potential threat to landlords/investors is the elimination of Prop 13 for investment properties and second homes. I doubt anyone will be able to overturn Prop 13 protection for primary residences (and I would NEVER want to see it), but there is no reason taxpayers should be subsidizing profits for landlords/investors. With the state and municipal budgets the way they are, the elimination of Prop 13 protection for investment properties is a definite possibility in the near future, IMHO, as it should be.