So coronavirus is definitely going to kill a few of us.

[adamantium]

the news is to depressing to watch, whats the consensus on how long this shit will last?

[SPIT this]

the news is to depressing to watch, whats the consensus on how long this shit will last?

6+ months

[Jayjami]

Druff, this is what happens when you give your “expert opinion” on shit you know nothing about in the real world. Number one problem: an eviction in the court system is going to take forever now. Problem number 2: once you evict them, who are your prospective tenants? Crickets chirping. Problem 3: now your abandoned building is ripe for vandalism and theft. Are you going to occupy and protect it yourself? All things considered, leaving the tenant in the building is probably a better option for now.

Here’s how you help the landlords recoup their losses: a one year reduction in property taxes.

Pretty sure I know more about this "real world" topic than you.

Now, to answer:

1) A slower eviction process is better than none at all. More importantly, keeping the process in place will cut down on the number of OSAs who decide not to pay rent just because they can get away with it. Right now these measures are emboldening tenants to cheat/freeroll landlords.

2) Any sane landlord would rather have a vacant apartment/house than one occupied with someone who has no intention upon paying rent.

3) Evictions aren't required. If the landlord fears that too many vacancies could lead to squatting or vandalism, he can simply choose not to evict. You are trying to advocate taking away their choice to evict.

4) Zeroing property taxes would only pay for a small fraction of the losses incurred by landlords in this spot. That's not compensation.

Landlords can also make deals with tenants. They can accept a reduced rent or defer a portion of payments until the person finds a job, or whatever. You just want to hand all the power to the tenants to screw landlords, and based upon your #2 and #3 points, you think the government is actually doing the landlords a favor.

Again, if the government wants landlords to be the new sponsors of a free housing social program, the landlords need to get paid.

Imagine, for example, if plumbers were required to work for free in 2020. How do you think that would go over?

Ok everybody. Listen to the computer geek. He’s always right. I’m just a 25 year attorney who has represented multiple landlords and tenants.

[JimmyG_415]

Signed the landlord,


Oh I see Druff only likes socialism when it favors him, healthcare for all no, bail out for landlords yes.
Like a page out of trickle down economics.

Every loan every landlord took, qualified on 9 months rent a year and had to show reserves to prove they could.
They "should" have at least 3 months before they should feel anything.

But, lets get real, they've been gouging THE F out of people for 10 years now, time to dip into their savings.

Don't worry Druff, Trump/Kushner are landlords, they are as corrupt as the day is long, they'll figure something out, like the Hotel bailout you know is coming due to Trump Hotels.
But I don't think they should, it was a gamble, and it paid off for years, now lets see where the chips fall.

What is next, the country club bail out for Mar-a-lago yearly dues?

suspending evictions and foreclosures until April month end seems reasonable to me

it is similar to what the federal government has already done re: income taxes--the penalty payment deadline has been moved to July 15.

Thus, the government has said: "you can pay later without penalty, but the taxes are not forgiven."

so rents have been deferred, not forgiven, by the suspension.


and to Tellafriend re: foreseeable -- business downturns happen regularly, most mild, but some severe as in 1974, 1981, 1987, 1994, 2001, and 2008...even in biblical times Pharaoh had Benjamin tell him to store up during the 7 years of good harvests for the coming 7 bad years..

This works for people who care about their credit.

There are a lot of people who will gladly take 12+ months of free rent in exchange for a credit hit. In fact, these people could gamble that down the road these credit hits would be erased due to some coronavirus forgiveness law.

If the government thinks this is such a great idea, they should be the ones to guarantee landlords that either the renters will pay or they'll pay (and then collect from some of these people down the line, possibly -- similar to back taxes owed).

[BCR]

So, it's already begun...wow that was fast...

https://www.fiercepharma.com/vaccine...erna-doses-1st

Meanwhile, amid growing numbers of infections in the U.S., the FDA has allowed a phase 1 study of Moderna’s mRNA vaccine without animal data. On Monday, the biotech said researchers at the National Institutes of Health dosed the first subject.

Kinda unprecendented, even Ebola Vaccine (which is now a thing because of the same kind of shortcuts) didn't go SO fast.

Another existing drug -- one related to treating malaria -- is also showing promise.

This is how he will "fix" things. It might work. It might not. I will happen though. This is the modus operandi for Mr. Trump...and it was clear yesterday morning before anyone had said anything about what his briefing today would be about. Basically, 5-10 different drug treatment and vaccines will all skip all animal trials and become "tests in the live population" (companies who own those drug/FDA be damned). OK, ok, animal tests will be done, but simultaneous with live population tests. It's pretty unprecedented.

It's gonna look brilliant if it works and it WILL allow Trump to say that he cured it / found the vaccine. Art of the Deal - End of the World/Economy version.

I’ve always been a strong proponent of a real serious talk with a patient and the ability to sign off on experimental treatment.

Vaccines are different than treatments though. If you’re really old and susceptible and don’t have to worry about long term side effects, I would be fine with people waiving liability and rolling the dice.

As far as treatment, I’m a fan of live trials if your doctor tells you you’re not making it anyway, or have almost no chance. So many on ventilators complicates this issue with the ability to get consent. Given the average age of patient, a lot of kids having to make difficult choices.

I like people having the ability to roll the dice when there are no time for trials. I haven’t thought through the implications of this on this virus. I’ve thought a lot about it in terms of cancer. I like the idea of live experiments on a vaccine less than treatment, unless the vaccine live trials are on really old people who are likely to die anyway. I imagine they are. First do no harm is pretty hardwired into doctors and I don’t see them rolling the dice on live trials with a lot of life expectancy. Everything is risk/reward and I’m for personal freedom.

[Sloppy Joe]

Pretty sure I know more about this "real world" topic than you.

Now, to answer:

1) A slower eviction process is better than none at all. More importantly, keeping the process in place will cut down on the number of OSAs who decide not to pay rent just because they can get away with it. Right now these measures are emboldening tenants to cheat/freeroll landlords.

2) Any sane landlord would rather have a vacant apartment/house than one occupied with someone who has no intention upon paying rent.

3) Evictions aren't required. If the landlord fears that too many vacancies could lead to squatting or vandalism, he can simply choose not to evict. You are trying to advocate taking away their choice to evict.

4) Zeroing property taxes would only pay for a small fraction of the losses incurred by landlords in this spot. That's not compensation.

Landlords can also make deals with tenants. They can accept a reduced rent or defer a portion of payments until the person finds a job, or whatever. You just want to hand all the power to the tenants to screw landlords, and based upon your #2 and #3 points, you think the government is actually doing the landlords a favor.

Again, if the government wants landlords to be the new sponsors of a free housing social program, the landlords need to get paid.

Imagine, for example, if plumbers were required to work for free in 2020. How do you think that would go over?

Ok everybody. Listen to the computer geek. He’s always right. I’m just a 25 year attorney who has represented multiple landlords and tenants.

Druff spends a lot of time consuming Fox News / conservative message board postings / Rush Limbaugh Stephen Crowder etc, distilling all the talking points that fit his worldview and presents them here, battling through life-altering illnesses and common colds, all while losing money.

The least you can do is be respectful and educate yourself.

[Dan Druff]

Pretty sure I know more about this "real world" topic than you.

Now, to answer:

1) A slower eviction process is better than none at all. More importantly, keeping the process in place will cut down on the number of OSAs who decide not to pay rent just because they can get away with it. Right now these measures are emboldening tenants to cheat/freeroll landlords.

2) Any sane landlord would rather have a vacant apartment/house than one occupied with someone who has no intention upon paying rent.

3) Evictions aren't required. If the landlord fears that too many vacancies could lead to squatting or vandalism, he can simply choose not to evict. You are trying to advocate taking away their choice to evict.

4) Zeroing property taxes would only pay for a small fraction of the losses incurred by landlords in this spot. That's not compensation.

Landlords can also make deals with tenants. They can accept a reduced rent or defer a portion of payments until the person finds a job, or whatever. You just want to hand all the power to the tenants to screw landlords, and based upon your #2 and #3 points, you think the government is actually doing the landlords a favor.

Again, if the government wants landlords to be the new sponsors of a free housing social program, the landlords need to get paid.

Imagine, for example, if plumbers were required to work for free in 2020. How do you think that would go over?

Ok everybody. Listen to the computer geek. He’s always right. I’m just a 25 year attorney who has represented multiple landlords and tenants.

This "computer geek" actually has a lot of real world experience in this industry. Look at some of my other posts on the topic over the years and you'll see that.

Your post reeks of that of an attorney who understands the law and the court system but not the business side of the industry.

The fact that you were actually claiming that landlords will benefit from being forced to have non-paying tenants, instead of vacancies, pretty much says it all. Try posting that on a landlords' forum or Facebook group and see what reaction you get.

[OSA]

Pretty sure I know more about this "real world" topic than you.

Now, to answer:

1) A slower eviction process is better than none at all. More importantly, keeping the process in place will cut down on the number of OSAs who decide not to pay rent just because they can get away with it. Right now these measures are emboldening tenants to cheat/freeroll landlords.

2) Any sane landlord would rather have a vacant apartment/house than one occupied with someone who has no intention upon paying rent.

3) Evictions aren't required. If the landlord fears that too many vacancies could lead to squatting or vandalism, he can simply choose not to evict. You are trying to advocate taking away their choice to evict.

4) Zeroing property taxes would only pay for a small fraction of the losses incurred by landlords in this spot. That's not compensation.

Landlords can also make deals with tenants. They can accept a reduced rent or defer a portion of payments until the person finds a job, or whatever. You just want to hand all the power to the tenants to screw landlords, and based upon your #2 and #3 points, you think the government is actually doing the landlords a favor.

Again, if the government wants landlords to be the new sponsors of a free housing social program, the landlords need to get paid.

Imagine, for example, if plumbers were required to work for free in 2020. How do you think that would go over?

Ok everybody. Listen to the computer geek. He’s always right. I’m just a 25 year attorney who has represented multiple landlords and tenants.

Whats your best approach then? I don't want them to not renew my lease when its done in Feb because they think I wont pay them again, but at the same time, I need a little break here. Do I approach with the 50% until things get back to normal? Their 1 week postponement of late fees seems like a weak way to save face because they know whats coming so they might expect this.

Thanks

[OSA]

Ok everybody. Listen to the computer geek. He’s always right. I’m just a 25 year attorney who has represented multiple landlords and tenants.

This "computer geek" actually has a lot of real world experience in this industry. Look at some of my other posts on the topic over the years and you'll see that.

Your post reeks of that of an attorney who understands the law and the court system but not the business side of the industry.

The fact that you were actually claiming that landlords will benefit from being forced to have non-paying tenants, instead of vacancies, pretty much says it all. Try posting that on a landlords' forum or Facebook group and see what reaction you get.

Do you know that in some cases, landlords pay non paying tenants to move? Paying as in their moving fees and their first month's rent elsewhere. This is after the 2-3 months they dont pay by the time the court action happens.

Do you think anyone is moving right now in NY? If anything they are moving OUT of NY and with their parents.

[Forum Wars]

Another existing drug -- one related to treating malaria -- is also showing promise.

This is how he will "fix" things. It might work. It might not. I will happen though. This is the modus operandi for Mr. Trump...and it was clear yesterday morning before anyone had said anything about what his briefing today would be about. Basically, 5-10 different drug treatment and vaccines will all skip all animal trials and become "tests in the live population" (companies who own those drug/FDA be damned). OK, ok, animal tests will be done, but simultaneous with live population tests. It's pretty unprecedented.

It's gonna look brilliant if it works and it WILL allow Trump to say that he cured it / found the vaccine. Art of the Deal - End of the World/Economy version.

I’ve always been a strong proponent of a real serious talk with a patient and the ability to sign off on experimental treatment.

Vaccines are different than treatments though. If you’re really old and susceptible and don’t have to worry about long term side effects, I would be fine with people waiving liability and rolling the dice.

As far as treatment, I’m a fan of live trials if your doctor tells you you’re not making it anyway, or have almost no chance. So many on ventilators complicates this issue with the ability to get consent. Given the average age of patient, a lot of kids having to make difficult choices.

I like people having the ability to roll the dice when there are no time for trials. I haven’t thought through the implications of this on this virus. I’ve thought a lot about it in terms of cancer. I like the idea of live experiments on a vaccine less than treatment, unless the vaccine live trials are on really old people who are likely to die anyway. I imagine they are. First do no harm is pretty hardwired into doctors and I don’t see them rolling the dice on live trials with a lot of life expectancy. Everything is risk/reward and I’m for personal freedom.

I am a numbers guy. It's pretty hard to see how the combination of hydroxychloroquine and antibiotic azithromycin together are NOT a cure. Right now. Based on this chart from the article.



https://techcrunch.com/2020/03/19/fr...d-19-duration/

[Daly]

Tons of people are getting temporarily laid off here, but the government are paying them 62% salary

That's not a terrible idea.

As long as it can be done for 6+ months without running da money printing machine.

Going to have to do something here.

[Dan Druff]

Ok everybody. Listen to the computer geek. He’s always right. I’m just a 25 year attorney who has represented multiple landlords and tenants.

Whats your best approach then? I don't want them to not renew my lease when its done in Feb because they think I wont pay them again, but at the same time, I need a little break here. Do I approach with the 50% until things get back to normal? Their 1 week postponement of late fees seems like a weak way to save face because they know whats coming so they might expect this.

Thanks

You can do what I did when rents precipitously fell in Vegas following the 2008 housing crash.

They tried to send me a renewal offer at 2007 rates. I LOL'd.

I came into the office, cited my perfect payment history and excellent credit, and said I wanted a big rent reduction going forward. They told me to eat shit and that they don't reduce rents. They even tried to lie and claim it was a fair housing violation (lol).

I told them, "Okay, I'll move down the street then. GL renting it at these rates, and GL getting someone with my credit, payment history, and good behavior history."

After thinking about it, they reduced my rent by like $350/month and I signed the renewal.

I would suggest going to them, stating that you plan upon paying the rent going forward and not causing any problems, but you'd like a reduction due to market conditions. You've actually got some power because your lease is up, and it will probably be hard for them to rent units right now.

Unless you live in an area where there is high demand (even in these times), at which point they may call your bluff.

[Dan Druff]

This "computer geek" actually has a lot of real world experience in this industry. Look at some of my other posts on the topic over the years and you'll see that.

Your post reeks of that of an attorney who understands the law and the court system but not the business side of the industry.

The fact that you were actually claiming that landlords will benefit from being forced to have non-paying tenants, instead of vacancies, pretty much says it all. Try posting that on a landlords' forum or Facebook group and see what reaction you get.

Do you know that in some cases, landlords pay non paying tenants to move? Paying as in their moving fees and their first month's rent elsewhere. This is after the 2-3 months they dont pay by the time the court action happens.

Do you think anyone is moving right now in NY? If anything they are moving OUT of NY and with their parents.

I don't know NY well, but yes, I've heard about this.

I'm just shooting from the hip with advice related to NY. I know California very well, and Nevada somewhat.

[Baron Von Strucker]

This "computer geek" actually has a lot of real world experience in this industry. Look at some of my other posts on the topic over the years and you'll see that.

Your post reeks of that of an attorney who understands the law and the court system but not the business side of the industry.

The fact that you were actually claiming that landlords will benefit from being forced to have non-paying tenants, instead of vacancies, pretty much says it all. Try posting that on a landlords' forum or Facebook group and see what reaction you get.

Do you know that in some cases, landlords pay non paying tenants to move? Paying as in their moving fees and their first month's rent elsewhere. This is after the 2-3 months they dont pay by the time the court action happens.

Do you think anyone is moving right now in NY? If anything they are moving OUT of NY and with their parents.

Happens all the time here in BC one of my neighbours not only had to pay this guy to leave he had not paid rent for more than three months and there was nothing that could be done about it other than a lengthy court process that would yield basically nothing as the dude had no money to sue for.

they finally got him out and decided to completely furnish the suit and rent it out on a three month agreement and extension if they feel the tenant won't fuck them.

they said they lost around 30,000 after the whole mess was done.

[OSA]

Whats your best approach then? I don't want them to not renew my lease when its done in Feb because they think I wont pay them again, but at the same time, I need a little break here. Do I approach with the 50% until things get back to normal? Their 1 week postponement of late fees seems like a weak way to save face because they know whats coming so they might expect this.

Thanks

You can do what I did when rents precipitously fell in Vegas following the 2008 housing crash.

They tried to send me a renewal offer at 2007 rates. I LOL'd.

I came into the office, cited my perfect payment history and excellent credit, and said I wanted a big rent reduction going forward. They told me to eat shit and that they don't reduce rents. They even tried to lie and claim it was a fair housing violation (lol).

I told them, "Okay, I'll move down the street then. GL renting it at these rates, and GL getting someone with my credit, payment history, and good behavior history."

After thinking about it, they reduced my rent by like $350/month and I signed the renewal.

I would suggest going to them, stating that you plan upon paying the rent going forward and not causing any problems, but you'd like a reduction due to market conditions. You've actually got some power because your lease is up, and it will probably be hard for them to rent units right now.

Unless you live in an area where there is high demand (even in these times), at which point they may call your bluff.

I live in NY. There's always demand. I just moved in Feb so I don't want them to think I was waiting for something like this to happen to cheat them. If I ask them for reduced rent, and the say yes, I would need to get that in writing because otherwise they can claim in 3 months or when this is over that I didn't want to pay rent and there was no deal made.

I know a Jew who rents commercial buildings and he has already come out and offered 35% discount on his properties for the time being. I have to assume they would be open to the same thing

[Dan Druff]

If some of these drugs turn out to be effective and can be made available quickly, this will be an INCREDIBLE step forward in many ways.

Right now everyone is in panic because of the unknown. There's this (understandably) scary virus which spreads like the flu but kills people at a much higher rate. If you get it, there's no cure, and you just need to hope and pray you don't die. Not very comforting, especially for the 65+ crowd who are most vulnerable.

If it turns out that existing drugs are effective against it, then suddenly a lot of the panic will die down. "If you catch it, you might be fucked" turns into "If you catch it and get treatment quickly, you're probably not fucked."

People will stop worrying as much, there will be a light at the end of the tunnel, markets will stop crashing, etc.

Prior to these discoveries, it seemed that our only medical hope was a vaccine 12-18 months away.

I really hope there's something to this.

[Shizzmoney]

I'm sorry, but for the past week Trump seems... sick

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/twt/status/1240374380338823172

The job is clearly getting to him.

That, and all of the cocaine he snorted off of a stripper's asshole at Studio 54 during the 80's is also catching up to him

[Dan Druff]

You can do what I did when rents precipitously fell in Vegas following the 2008 housing crash.

They tried to send me a renewal offer at 2007 rates. I LOL'd.

I came into the office, cited my perfect payment history and excellent credit, and said I wanted a big rent reduction going forward. They told me to eat shit and that they don't reduce rents. They even tried to lie and claim it was a fair housing violation (lol).

I told them, "Okay, I'll move down the street then. GL renting it at these rates, and GL getting someone with my credit, payment history, and good behavior history."

After thinking about it, they reduced my rent by like $350/month and I signed the renewal.

I would suggest going to them, stating that you plan upon paying the rent going forward and not causing any problems, but you'd like a reduction due to market conditions. You've actually got some power because your lease is up, and it will probably be hard for them to rent units right now.

Unless you live in an area where there is high demand (even in these times), at which point they may call your bluff.

I live in NY. There's always demand. I just moved in Feb so I don't want them to think I was waiting for something like this to happen to cheat them. If I ask them for reduced rent, and the say yes, I would need to get that in writing because otherwise they can claim in 3 months or when this is over that I didn't want to pay rent and there was no deal made.

I know a Jew who rents commercial buildings and he has already come out and offered 35% discount on his properties for the time being. I have to assume they would be open to the same thing

Are you actually working right now? Are you honestly making as much as before, or are you seeing reduced pay/commissions/whatever?

The strongest position from which to argue in this spot is, "I still have an income and can pay rent, just not as much rent", and that might be preferable to someone who just shuts down and doesn't pay. If you could prove this, it would be even better.

And yes, obv get anything in writing.

[TheXFactor]

the news is to depressing to watch, whats the consensus on how long this shit will last?

12 to 18 months until they have a vaccine.

However, pharmaceutical companies have been hesitant to invest in a vaccine until they know that this is something that comes back every season like the flu, pneumonia and other diseases. That way they can milk it for every cent possible.

[GrenadaRoger]

The fact that you were actually claiming that landlords will benefit from being forced to have non-paying tenants, instead of vacancies, pretty much says it all. Try posting that on a landlords' forum or Facebook group and see what reaction you get.

common practice among homeowners, its called house-sitting, and it is just to make sure the property will be looked after while idle. we had a spare house with which did just that...and it was a good thing we did...because in the year after the sitter finished and we got our spare occupied, the house next to it was squatted in...the police had to come remove the druggies