Houses get consumed surprisingly quickly. That’s why there is depreciation. That’s why in California the useful life on a carpet is 5 years for a rental. That’s why when you look at rent controlled areas, the rentals tend to quite cruddy.
You’re argument is the same as saying everybody workig down at the auto-shop doesn’t produce anything. They just do maintenance.
As for renters being willing to pay more, you’re wrong there too. Most renters aren’t renting because they can’t get loans, they rent because they perceive themselves as temporarily in a given location. They perceive ownership as being more expensive, time consuming and a hassle.
And frankly,most people grossly underestimate the true cost of ownership for a property. That’s why you see all that deferred maintenance in sales. Time consumes buildings.
Agree with you about the depreciation of buildings, nsr, but owner-occupiers are perfectly capable of doing their own maintenance if that’s what they want to do. Landlords are NOT doing renters a favor by maintaining the rentals; they are able to rent for a higher price if a building is well-maintained and in a good location near other well-maintained buildings.
Again, if landlords are making a profit, then it’s the *renters* who are paying for all of the maintenance.
Not to mention the fact that LLs are allowed to deduct maintenance costs and depreciation, reducing much-needed tax revenues.
