The thing is that property letting is a useful service to society. If you intend to live somewhere for more than 3 months but less than 3 years, it makes a lot of sense to rent somewhere. I guess you could still have live-in landlords, but that's quite awkward if the tenants are a family or group of friends.
People say this. Then I run into landlords who proudly talk about how their tenants are paying for all of their expenses and more or how they find ways to avoid paying for important amenities.
Absolutely. I am not defending landlords. I think a horrendous proportion of them are corrupt like this. The system needs heavy regulating but I don't think it's a good idea to disband it completely.
Rental flats can totally be a thing without private landlords in the picture - rental companies that are either government owned or follow strict government guidelines for example.
In my (UK-centric) experience it is largely the rental companies that make renting a nightmare. Back when I was a renter I would always look for private landlords when moving house as they were often more reasonable and responsive. Big rental companies would respond slowly, issue exorbitant fees, demand professional end-of-tenancy cleaning, and screw you on pre-existing damage if you don't point it out in time.
Salt Lake City has this, I believe. If you're in the COLDS (never noticed this acronym before!) then you might well be working for the church, banking with the church, and renting from the church.
