By Curt Anderson August 2, 2021 9:32 pm Category: Career (0.0 from 0 votes) Rules of the Post Write A New Article How To Post Here Rate this article (5=best, 0=poor)

Is it because of the unemployment rate?

U.S. Bureau Of Labor Statistics' most recent report on civilian unemployment rate pegs the June jobless rate at 5.9%. That's close to average. The unemployment rate in the United States averaged 5.77 percent from 1948 until 2021, reaching an all time high of 14.80 percent in April of 2020 and a record low of 2.50 percent in May of 1953.

In the last 100 years the unemployment rate has been higher than the current rate for about 25 of those years. Recently, the US civilian unemployment rate was higher than it is now for six years between and including the months of August 2008 when it was 6.1% until September 2014 when it was 5.9%. There wasn't serious talk of an eviction moratorium then.

Landlords may not be the most sympathetic capitalists in the world, but why pick on them? Nobody is telling any other business sector to extend unlimited credit to their customers. Most landlords have mortgages to pay. Landlords have business and property taxes and other expenses to pay. Landlords still are obligated to keep there rentals maintained and safe.

If a tenant doesn't make the monthly payments, unlike a car dealer, the landlord can't repossess anything. However the bank can foreclose on a property, including a landlords' rental, if the monthly mortgage payments aren't made.

Cited and related links:

1. bls.gov
2. tradingeconomics.com

Comments Start Below

by HatetheSwamp on August 3, 2021 3:27 am Amen. Preach it, brother! by Donna on August 4, 2021 9:06 am The eviction moratorium has been extended thanks to the activism of people like Cori Bush, AOC, and Bernie Sanders. by Donna on August 4, 2021 9:39 am 1 in 7 Renters are behind in their rent See link below. cnbc.com by Curt Anderson on August 4, 2021 10:29 am The eviction moratorium is killing small landlords “In my particular instance the tenant is not cooperating with even completing the application. I’m just a small landlord, and I’m not a big corporation like many of the other large rental organizations, so although the funding is very helpful, if the tenant doesn’t cooperate everything falls apart,” said Simon. Curt's two cents: 1. Since evictions are halted, if the tenant doesn't complete the application for federal assistance in paying the rent, the landlord should be able to. 2. Any tenant in the household old enough and medically eligible to be vaccinated should be vaccinated as a pre-condition for federal rent assistance. cnbc.com by Donna on August 4, 2021 11:43 am I agree with both of your proposals. by Curt_Anderson on August 27, 2021 8:57 am Because of last night's Supreme Court case decision I'm resurrecting this thread which I started at the beginning of the month. In my original article I ask why landlord should be the one business sector obliged to help economically disadvantaged people. And that's the question that the Supreme Court asked and their decision. In their decision they asked could the CDC demand that grocery stores send free groceries to poor people? by Ponderer on August 27, 2021 9:08 am Why should employers have to supply people's health insurance? The eviction moratorium was a pragmatic emergency action taken in the face of a devastating societal catastrophe. Yes, I feel bad for small-time landlords (I couldn't give a flying rat's ass about the huge property owning corporations who will be fine no matter what). But even the tragedy of what small landlords are feeling is a far cry from the horror show that our streets would currently be a stage to and the countless millions who would be condemned to be actors in. Especially when many of our streets are already a horror show of homelessness. by Curt_Anderson on August 27, 2021 9:19 am Ponderer, The point is it should not be the job of one business sector to address society's ills. Homelessness should be addressed by the government and/or charitable groups. I know a guy who I guess you might call a big-time landlord inasmuch as he's got maybe a couple dozen rental properties. That's all he does. He spends his time painting the properties, maintaining, fixing things, doing all the upkeep, interviewing new tenants, etc. He makes not much more than a modest living working essentially as his own maintenance man. If the tenants all stopped paying rent he's in a world of hurt. And the same goes for the really big landlords, if renting places is your business and people aren't paying rent it's hard to survive. by Ponderer on August 27, 2021 9:55 am And if all those landlords were able to go ahead and kick out all those who lost their jobs and only source of income and couldn't come up with rent, there'd be millions more on the streets than are there now. EVERYONE who wasn't already tremendously wealthy before this started has been hurt by this pandemic. Do you know how many restaurant owners lost everything because of the pandemic? Should the government not have stepped in and made regulations that were going to result in that? Given the inevitable outcome of having not done it? When I said it was a pragmatic emergency action, that's exactly what I meant it was. Pragmatically, comparing the financial loss that landlords were going to take against the living hell that would have been caused for and by all those many millions of people being thrown into the street with nowhere to turn was a no-brainer, I am sorry to say. But if you think sparing a few million landlords financial hardship is worse, pragmatically, than the living hell that would have been experienced by the tens of millions who would have been thrown into homeless destitution, I'd like to see your math. I have yet to see a single story about a landlord thrown out into the street because his tenants stopped paying them rent. I don't think the moratorium should go on forever. But just stopping it all of a sudden isn't the right way to go about it. by Donna on August 27, 2021 10:45 am Good point, hon. In the best world, the government would be reimbursing everyone who's been financially ruined by COVID, including landlords, but since we don't live in that world, the logical and most compassionate thing to do would be to take the course of action that would help the most people. If we had a needs-driven economic system instead of a profit-driven one, no one would have to worry about being ruined financially, but we don't live in that world either. Go To Top

Find old posts & articles

Show Most Recent Articles Articles by category: Politics+ Religion+ Law & Crime Military News Media History Health Sports+ Humor Entertainment Misc.

Report spam & abuse SelectSmart.com home page