The General Musings of Falkie2013 (George Senda, The Guy From Pittsburgh)

[ONeill]

That's one of the most f'd up things I've ever seen.

I agree, that's why I thought of this thread as a fitting place.

[pate]

HONESTLY THE ONLY REASON I LOOK AT THE BELCHIE THREAD IS TO READ PALADIN'S COMMENTS! I KNOW YOU DON'T GET PAID BROTHER, BUT MORE OF YOUR ANALYSIS WOULD BE APPRECIATED! SEMPER FIDELIS!

This

(?)

sp

ediot: FT. ROX, I WEEL FULLOW (FELLLOW?sp) YEW TO THE ENDS OF EARF!

[pate]

... we are doomed...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkWIn3GE9Ec

[GeorgieForPresident2216]

Pets can be a hazard or nuisance for other tenants.  They increase the expense and maintenance requirements for the landlord and property owner.  They may infect the apartment with dander or flees for future tenants.  They have the potential to create a noise nuisance at all hours of the day and night.  Young or old pets may have issues with staining the carpets with their excretions.  Any attempt to verify that the owner is responsible for their pets and that the pets are well behaved means extra time for the landlord to vet their renters, and probably would properly require some training in animal behaviour.  That's all just off the top of my head.

The property owners should have the discretion, as they do, to ban pets from their building, first to reduce their headaches, expenses, and maintenance requirements, and second to allow a comfortable, clean building for those tenants who do not wish to be around animals.  Property owners and tenants should no more be forced to deal with pets in their building than they should be forced to allow grow ops or allow tenants to fill up the entire building with cannabis smoke to the displeasure of other tenants.

The supposed free market should take care of this problem.  If there is a need for buildings allowing pets that is going unfulfilled, then that creates a niche for other property owners who are willing to go to the extra hassles of allowing pets.  Isn't this what modern conservatives are always calling for?  More free market and less government regulation?

[onan]

Having owned rental property, I can most assuredly tell anyone that not all pet owners are equal. Having to pull up carpet, padding and sub-flooring due to cat piss costs more than most pet deposits. Yeah, I agree people should be able to have pets; imo we are evolutionarily groomed to have pets. But I will be goddamned if I will let just anyone move into my rental home with pets unless they are completely financially capable of owning a pet.

[pate]

Pets can be a hazard or nuisance for other tenants.  They increase the expense and maintenance requirements for the landlord and property owner.  They may infect the apartment with dander or flees for future tenants.  They have the potential to create a noise nuisance at all hours of the day and night.  Young or old pets may have issues with staining the carpets with their excretions.  Any attempt to verify that the owner is responsible for their pets and that the pets are well behaved means extra time for the landlord to vet their renters, and probably would properly require some training in animal behaviour.  That's all just off the top of my head.

The property owners should have the discretion, as they do, to ban pets from their building, first to reduce their headaches, expenses, and maintenance requirements, and second to allow a comfortable, clean building for those tenants who do not wish to be around animals.  Property owners and tenants should no more be forced to deal with pets in their building than they should be forced to allow grow ops or allow tenants to fill up the entire building with cannabis smoke to the displeasure of other tenants.

The supposed free market should take care of this problem.  If there is a need for buildings allowing pets that is going unfulfilled, then that creates a niche for other property owners who are willing to go to the extra hassles of allowing pets.  Isn't this what modern conservatives are always calling for?  More free market and less government regulation?

As a "LandLord" or "PropertyOwner" I feel I should chime in:

You talking about cats or dogs?  (in house shitters or outside shitters?)

I suppose as a "LandLord" or "PropertyOwner" it maka no difference...

ediot:  I have no "tenants" or "room-mates"

[3OctaveFart]

When I rented I considered the pet deposit gone as soon as I wrote the check. My purebreds never pissed on a single floor.

[GeorgieForPresident2216]

As a "LandLord" or "PropertyOwner" I feel I should chime in:

You talking about cats or dogs?  (in house shitters or outside shitters?)

I suppose as a "LandLord" or "PropertyOwner" it maka no difference...

ediot:  I have no "tenants" or "room-mates"

I haven't made a distinction.
Who do you lord your land over?

[Yorkshire pud]

All things considered I think a reasonable deposit might be more appropriate for Senda before pets.

[onan]

When I rented I considered the pet deposit gone as soon as I wrote the check. My purebreds never pissed on a single floor.

Yeah, I believe you. You are the rare exception.

[PB the Deplorable]

You know, the tax code is very beneficial to those renting property.  All related expenses are deductible. Hold for a few years - or even right away - and the place will be cash positive (rising rents covering mostly flat payments and expenses), but it will show a loss and reduce other taxable income when depreciation is deducted.  When sold, it qualifies for the capital gains rate, or maybe no tax at all if certain owner residency conditions are met

While the property increases in value over time, the mortgage is locked in from the date of purchase.  Here in California the property taxes are also locked in from the date of purchase.  When rents in the area rise, and in some places that can be considerable, the landlord doesn't mind raising rents - while his expenses are relatively flat.  A person can refi and pull money out tax free. 

On the other hand there is no deduction for rent paid.  Renters subsidize landlords through the tax code

Sure, it takes time and effort, and there are some lousy tenants (so get references, drive by the place where someone who applied is living now), but I don't hear about very many people getting out of the business.  It may be one of the best 2 or 3 ways to build wealth in this country.  A rule of thumb is to live no further than 30 minutes of the rental - if for nothing else than to be able to inspect the place, make sure it's maintained, and catch problems (such as animal problems) early

Stacked against that, a few pets aren't a problem

[Yorkshire pud]

You know, the tax code is very beneficial to those renting property.  All related expenses are deductible. Hold for a few years - or even right away - and the place will be cash positive (rising rents covering mostly flat payments and expenses), but it will show a loss and reduce other taxable income when depreciation is deducted.  When sold, it qualifies for the capital gains rate, or maybe no tax at all if certain owner residency conditions are met

While the property increases in value over time, the mortgage is locked in from the date of purchase.  Here in California the property taxes are also locked in from the date of purchase.  When rents in the area rise, and in some places that can be considerable, the landlord doesn't mind raising rents - while his expenses are relatively flat.  A person can refi and pull money out tax free. 

On the other hand there is no deduction for rent paid.  Renters subsidize landlords through the tax code

Sure, it takes time and effort, and there are some lousy tenants (so get references, drive by the place where someone who applied is living now), but I don't hear about very many people getting out of the business.  It may be one of the best 2 or 3 ways to build wealth.  I've heard a rule of thumb is to live within 30 minutes of the rental - if for nothing else than to be able to inspect the place, make sure it's maintained, and catch problems (such as animal problems) early

Stacked against that, a few pets aren't a problem

Fair enough; but it still remains Senda is a grabbing twat who plays the system and is a self obsessed cunt.

[onan]

You know, the tax code is very beneficial to those renting property.  All related expenses are deductible. Hold for a few years - or even right away - and the place will be cash positive (rising rents covering mostly flat payments and expenses), but it will show a loss and reduce other taxable income when depreciation is deducted.  When sold, it qualifies for the capital gains rate, or maybe no tax at all if certain owner residency conditions are met

While the property increases in value over time, the mortgage is locked in from the date of purchase.  Here in California the property taxes are also locked in from the date of purchase.  When rents in the area rise, and in some places that can be considerable, the landlord doesn't mind raising rents - while his expenses are relatively flat.  A person can refi and pull money out tax free. 

On the other hand there is no deduction for rent paid.  Renters subsidize landlords through the tax code

Sure, it takes time and effort, and there are some lousy tenants (so get references, drive by the place where someone who applied is living now), but I don't hear about very many people getting out of the business.  It may be one of the best 2 or 3 ways to build wealth.  I've heard a rule of thumb is to live within 30 minutes of the rental - if for nothing else than to be able to inspect the place, make sure it's maintained, and catch problems (such as animal problems) early

Stacked against that, a few pets aren't a problem

Pets are a privilege, want one? suffer the responsibilities to have one. I have had pets for most of my life. I never expected any property owner to allow me to have pets. I continued to look until I found one that did. Then, I made damn sure there were no reasons for the landlord to regret his decision. Adults with mild disabilities claiming they need a pet but can't take care of themselves do not make a convincing argument to have the proviledge.

[3OctaveFart]

Onan-
My widowed mother has spinal stenosis. I believe she needs her pets for morale, but there are times taking care of them is a real fkn chore. Cats especially.
And I'm not fool enough to think those pets aid her with her physical limitations.
Maybe Kathie needs the cat for depression, I don't know.

[aldousburbank]

Onan-
Maybe Kathie needs the cat for depression, I don't know.

I find that a little pussy is a great depression lifter.

[3OctaveFart]

You're not incorrect, mon ami.

[onan]

Onan-
My widowed mother has spinal stenosis. I believe she needs her pets for morale, but there are times taking care of them is a real fkn chore. Cats especially.
And I'm not fool enough to think those pets aid her with her physical limitations.
Maybe Kathie needs the cat for depression, I don't know.

There are much better therapies for depression than a cat. Not as much fun though.

[aldousburbank]

You are a missing link in evolution Bulkie, a hairless gorilla.

http://youtu.be/f0P4RrD3Y0Q

[3OctaveFart]

I find a steady piss-stream of income helps make life's rains go away.
I suggested one of the two work a 15-hour/week job, and that was met with crickets.

[aldousburbank]

I find a steady piss-stream of income helps make life's rains go away.
I suggested one of the two work a 15-hour/week job, and that was met with crickets.

Is that including the eight hour walk? What about tolls?

[Chocolate coated jackboot]

‘Emotional support’ pig removed from airplane after defecating

[ONeill]

Pets are a privilege, want one? suffer the responsibilities to have one. I have had pets for most of my life. I never expected any property owner to allow me to have pets. I continued to look until I found one that did. Then, I made damn sure there were no reasons for the landlord to regret his decision. Adults with mild disabilities claiming they need a pet but can't take care of themselves do not make a convincing argument to have the proviledge.

this^^^

[paladin1991]

Isn't ever going to happen.
She never apologized to me.
Enough said about her as far as I am concerned.
And I did apologize in the videos I did and complained that she never replied in any manner, so don't try to make it look like I didn't, Patho Jen.
But this is a reply to Aldous.
And I have enough to deal with as it with with trying to get Kathy into her new apartment anyway.
And one of the jerks on here said something to the effect of :

" Who ever heard of a fucking service cat ? "

Well, Kathy has the doctor's letter and the certificate.
And Boop is both a service cat for medical issues and an emotional needs cat and fits the criteria under the law for allowing a tenant with medical AND emotional needs to have a cat.

do you get to claim Boop as both as well?  Does this increase your gubmint check?

[coaster]

Falkie not knowing what Noory's new show is about raises some red flags. Wasn't he trying to rub his new gig in everyone's face? It doesn't sound like you are part of the show at all Falkie. What does skype commentary of a show even mean? It's pretty odd if you think about it.

[paladin1991]

I am a cat freak and see no aspects of serviceability to housecats. The law is an ass.
As stated I am glad it will not go homeless, or that somebody won't be deprived of a great companion.

Or a meal.

[paladin1991]

I have been a pet owner for more than 35 years and rescue animals all the time. I have a soft spot for almost all animals.

Even the falkappotamos?

[paladin1991]

Yeah, great.  And most other landlords would prefer no pets as well, which makes it hard for a renter to even have a pet in a lot of places.  That's not fair, property rental is not just another business - it's also someone's home.  How about just get a bigger deposit?

Landlords would prefer to not have kids there either.  Or low income people.  Or anyone not like them.  Which is why we have some of the laws we have, including the service animal 'scam'

Maybe some of these landlords are in the wrong business

Where's PB?  Who the hell are you?

[GeorgieForPresident2216]

R.I.P The General Musings of Falkie2013 thread.

[twiki]

I see this is still a thing. Do I need to read the past 20 pages that I've missed or can someone give me the short hand version of events?

[b_dubb]

I see this is still a thing. Do I need to read the past 20 pages that I've missed or can someone give me the short hand version of events?

No. I never did understand who Pal-o-poop was supposed to be. Don't want to know either