I’ve been making the same point since my first reply to you. My position has never changed, which is a correction to your insinuation that the corporate ownership of single family homes as rental properties isn’t ultimately a big deal because it’s a small amount overall
Here’s what you said:
This is doomerist myth. It’s a miniscule fraction, go look up the actual numbers. Landlords selling their properties would be very good for everyone.
It’s only a miniscule fraction NATIONALLY. That’s why I said what I originally said about Atlanta in my initial reply, where there IS a very real problem of available inventory because 1/9 homes are owned by national corporations. It’s not a myth for everyone.
Then you said my data was wrong (for which your own WP article said I was right,) which I already said was explicitly about the metro Atlanta area, not the nation. Then you double and triple downed with a pinch of condescension and dickishness. Then I called you a dumb cunt.
You could’ve just said “oops my bad, I misread your comment” which you either did or have just been trolling this whole time.
For what it’s worth I do agree with you that landlords selling would be good, regardless of the local, regional, or national quantity of single family homes owned by national corporations. That was never in question for me. Just the first part.
Guess where most people live. Is it in Atlanta? No, it’s in the nation.
1/9 homes are owned by national corporations
Yeah, it sounds like Atlanta has a problem. We’re not in disagreement on that. You don’t need to keep bringing it up because it’s not relevant to the discussion, which is about whether or not it’s a problem that most people need to worry about.
“That sounds like an Atlanta problem” one can only reasonably address this issue locally/regionally. To paint broad strokes with the national average is CRAZY disingenuous given addressing inventory deficiencies isn’t like shipping a widget from Omaha to Los Angeles.
Most people need to not worry about the national average because it is skewed (speaking of - what is the actual distribution?) - they need to worry about wherever they actually are.
ETA addressing the last paragraph of your comment: agreed! That is something to be celebrated. Wallowing in doomerism certainly doesn’t help anyone but let’s also not pretend this isn’t a very real problem people face (home unavailability).
one can only reasonably address this issue locally/regionally
Yes. Never said otherwise.
they need to worry about wherever they actually are.
Yes, and 98% of people are not in Atlanta. What’s the percent in other cities, do you know? If not, then the national number of 0.2% seems like our best proxy, and that number seems to indicate most cities are not having this problem. If you have data that covers all metropolitan areas and not just Atlanta, then I’m all ears, but I couldn’t find anything like that.
I’ve been making the same point since my first reply to you. My position has never changed, which is a correction to your insinuation that the corporate ownership of single family homes as rental properties isn’t ultimately a big deal because it’s a small amount overall
Here’s what you said:
It’s only a miniscule fraction NATIONALLY. That’s why I said what I originally said about Atlanta in my initial reply, where there IS a very real problem of available inventory because 1/9 homes are owned by national corporations. It’s not a myth for everyone.
Then you said my data was wrong (for which your own WP article said I was right,) which I already said was explicitly about the metro Atlanta area, not the nation. Then you double and triple downed with a pinch of condescension and dickishness. Then I called you a dumb cunt.
You could’ve just said “oops my bad, I misread your comment” which you either did or have just been trolling this whole time.
For what it’s worth I do agree with you that landlords selling would be good, regardless of the local, regional, or national quantity of single family homes owned by national corporations. That was never in question for me. Just the first part.
Guess where most people live. Is it in Atlanta? No, it’s in the nation.
Yeah, it sounds like Atlanta has a problem. We’re not in disagreement on that. You don’t need to keep bringing it up because it’s not relevant to the discussion, which is about whether or not it’s a problem that most people need to worry about.
“That sounds like an Atlanta problem” one can only reasonably address this issue locally/regionally. To paint broad strokes with the national average is CRAZY disingenuous given addressing inventory deficiencies isn’t like shipping a widget from Omaha to Los Angeles.
Most people need to not worry about the national average because it is skewed (speaking of - what is the actual distribution?) - they need to worry about wherever they actually are.
ETA addressing the last paragraph of your comment: agreed! That is something to be celebrated. Wallowing in doomerism certainly doesn’t help anyone but let’s also not pretend this isn’t a very real problem people face (home unavailability).
Yes. Never said otherwise.
Yes, and 98% of people are not in Atlanta. What’s the percent in other cities, do you know? If not, then the national number of 0.2% seems like our best proxy, and that number seems to indicate most cities are not having this problem. If you have data that covers all metropolitan areas and not just Atlanta, then I’m all ears, but I couldn’t find anything like that.