COVID Economy

[mu_hilltopper]

I agree.  It should have ended months ago, frankly.    The eviction pause was created to help during an economy that was halted by covid, with millions out of work.

Now, the economy .. is smoking.  Anyone who wants a job can have one this afternoon .. and the jobs are paying thousands better than just 24 months ago.

Zero reasons to have an eviction moratorium, August 2021, other than we don't like to have homeless people. 

[jficke13]

It will take many months, if not a year or more, to get all the evictions through the courts.

Maybe? Structurally at least in Wisconsin evictions have a kind of fast track to completion. While I'm sure it won't go as fast as "normal," I don't think it will be nearly as slow to cut through the backlog as one might think.

[warriorchick]

Maybe? Structurally at least in Wisconsin evictions have a kind of fast track to completion. While I'm sure it won't go as fast as "normal," I don't think it will be nearly as slow to cut through the backlog as one might think.

In the states which I have familiarity with (Illinois, Michigan, Indiana mostly), the common practice is to serve the legal 5-day notice to everyone who is a week or so late paying their rent. Five days later, you could file suit, and it took a minimum of 8 weeks to get a court date for an eviction in normal times.  Then it might take another month or more for the sheriff to "set them out".  So add that all up, and that's 3-4 months.  And that doesn't take into account that often, a judge will give them another 30 days to "find the money", which they never do.

Factor in that there are probably 10 times the number of people (or more) behind in their rent right now, and the same number of people in the court system and sheriff's department processing them all, and you tell me how long it will take to physically evict them all.

[Skatastrophy]

Wild that so many of you are in favor of kicking people out of their homes when they potentially have 12+ months of back-rent due. I wish that there was a plan to help these people with rent forgiveness. It's wild to punish the unnemployed/underemployed, but also wild to punish the landlords. Give people a path to get back on their feet, imo.

[JWags85]

Wild that so many of you are in favor of kicking people out of their homes when they potentially have 12+ months of back-rent due. I wish that there was a plan to help these people with rent forgiveness. It's wild to punish the unnemployed/underemployed, but also wild to punish the landlords. Give people a path to get back on their feet, imo.

Nobody is in favor of "kicking people out of their homes", but its ridiculous that there is still a moratorium handling rent/evictions in the same way as we did a year or more ago when things were in a MUCH worse place.

I don't disagree that there should be a path back, but kicking the can further down the road with a further moratorium is not the answer.  You can always find justification to keep it going if you really want to.

[Spotcheck Billy]

Get the states to pay out the $47 billion put aside for this.

[jesmu84]

Get the states to pay out the $47 billion put aside for this.

This is a great point

[mu_hilltopper]

Wild that so many of you are in favor of kicking people out of their homes when they potentially have 12+ months of back-rent due. I wish that there was a plan to help these people with rent forgiveness. It's wild to punish the unnemployed/underemployed, but also wild to punish the landlords. Give people a path to get back on their feet, imo.

Hmm.. Aren't we all interested in evicting someone with 12 months back-rent due?  If not, where do you draw the line?  13 months?  18?  24? 

Honestly .. I think the number of people who were helped by the EM because of COVID was likely a quarter of the total.  The other three quarters were people who just decided to stop paying because paying $0 for rent is better. 

This is similar to what happens from December-April on electric/gas bills when they cannot be shut off.  People don't pay, April 1 rolls around and they are cut off, then magically someone else "moves in" and opens a new account in a new name and the old bill is never paid.

[jesmu84]

Extended

[pacearrow02]

Extended

While acknowledging it is likely unconstitutional he said he would be able to get the money out the door while it's held up in court. 

So much for that oath of office thing.

[mu_hilltopper]

Well .. on the plus side, if you're going to ignore a law it's kinda refreshing to do it to help poor people instead of, oh, I dunno, furthering your own political power.

[pacearrow02]

Well .. on the plus side, if you're going to ignore a law it's kinda refreshing to do it to help poor people instead of, oh, I dunno, furthering your own political power.

Ahhh....good to see whataboutism is back in style.

[Uncle Rico]

Ahhh....good to see whataboutism is back in style.

Coming from you, that's rich

[mu_hilltopper]

Ahhh....good to see whataboutism is back in style.

It stands on its own without it looking backwards, though. 

"If he's going to ignore a law at least he's doing it to help the poor."   

The look-back is just a nice bonus.

[jesmu84]

It stands on its own without it looking backwards, though. 

"If he's going to ignore a law at least he's doing it to help the poor."   

The look-back is just a nice bonus.

Moral consideration? Ethical consideration? Gross!

[MU82]

To do this without also giving help to landlords, especially smaller operators, is bad form IMHO.

They also have bills to pay, families to provide for, kids to put through college, aging parents to care for, etc.

[mu_hilltopper]

Moral consideration? Ethical consideration? Gross!

Right you are.  My BAC is out of range and I'm not thinking straight. 


(Blood Arby's Content.)

[pacearrow02]

Coming from you, that's rich

I'm for sure guilty of it, and was correctly called to the carpet for it.  Just figured those that were so offended by it a year ago would be consistent with their outrage.  Oh well.

[jesmu84]

To do this without also giving help to landlords, especially smaller operators, is bad form IMHO.

They also have bills to pay, families to provide for, kids to put through college, aging parents to care for, etc.

Which is why that $47 billion needs to get into the hands of rents and landlords alike. That's exactly why it's out there.

Why isn't this money getting dispersed?

[MU82]

Which is why that $47 billion needs to get into the hands of rents and landlords alike. That's exactly why it's out there.

Why isn't this money getting dispersed?

Agree 100%.

[Hards Alumni]

I said months ago, the next bailout will be landlords and renters.

[pacearrow02]

The text in this CDC extension or "bill", not sure what to even call it is pretty insane. 

Threatening arrest and jail time to landlords who don't comply!!

[jesmu84]

The text in this CDC extension or "bill", not sure what to even call it is pretty insane. 

Threatening arrest and jail time to landlords who don't comply!!

Insane to punish folks who do something illegal?

[pacearrow02]

Insane to punish folks who do something illegal?

Illegal says who?  The CDC?

The initial bill has expired.  Supreme Court has already weighed in on this and said the CDC didn't have the power to extend it.  Biden admitted this and so did the head of the CDC over the past couple days.

Media complained enough, the squad setup a homeless camp on the stairs of the capital, and the administration caved who are now doing an admittedly unconstitutional act against the very oath of office he took.  You can spin it with some moral high ground argument and maybe it's the right thing to do at the end of the day but this could become a slippery slope.

[jesmu84]

Illegal says who?  The CDC?

The initial bill has expired.  Supreme Court has already weighed in on this and said the CDC didn't have the power to extend it.  Biden admitted this and so did the head of the CDC over the past couple days.

Media complained enough, the squad setup a homeless camp on the stairs of the capital, and the administration caved who are now doing an admittedly unconstitutional act against the very oath of office he took.  You can spin it with some moral high ground argument and maybe it's the right thing to do at the end of the day but this could become a slippery slope.

Lol. Got it

Illegal is in the eye of the beholder. Good to know for future law discussion.