• Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Massive property tax increase. Owner-occupants are exempted from that tax.

    As soon as a bank initiates foreclosure proceedings, they owe the full, non-exempt tax rate. That stick gives them a strong incentive to work with their borrower.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      20 hours ago

      That article also talks about a lot of the properties being tear downs. It’s easy to say that a homeless person would find just about anything a step up, but realistically it has to be habitable, salable, maintainable. No one would want the liability of a below standard house, nor the PR hit of giving a junk house

      • Muad'dib@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        14 hours ago

        I’ve been homeless. Give me a shit house I can call mine and let me work to improve it. Let me put money into replacing the pipes and removing the mold instead of into rent. With the prices landlords are charging these days, it would be easy.

      • BoxOfFeet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        That’s what I was thinking, too. The article says 116 houses per homeless person in Detroit. Has this person ever been to Detroit? Vacant houses there aren’t even safe to look at.

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I’m from a rural area in New York, and it’s similar. My brother considered house flipping because some were so cheap you could do it by credit card. However they tended to be abandoned for years, not really salvageable, plus the population was dwindling so not much hope for a sale, ever