> Property tax winds up being cheaper per sq/ft of rental than on an individual home.

I hadn't thought about that.

> maintenance is lower per sq/ft

This makes sense on a per repair basis. Is it still true when you account for the incentive misalignments between renters and landlords? For instance, moral hazard leading to more frequent repairs. 

Also, landlords are incentivized to minimize costs, where owners maximize the utility of the occupant.

> my point is that the renter pays those fees every month, regardless of need or service quality

That is true with 2 caveats:

* Property tax winds up being cheaper per sq/ft of rental than on an individual home. There are many reasons for this, but the biggest is that large realestate developers have better lawyers and connections with city property tax appraisal office

* Likewise, maintenance is lower per sq/ft....Large property managers have 1 or 2 maintenance men on-staff that perform most repairs. Added to that, they are buying equipment (ie. new A/C unit) direct manufacturer price and not imposing a markup. So those lower cost are amortized over all the renters. 

tldr. economies of scale.

freetx

> Still, my point is that the renter pays those fees every month, regardless of need or service quality. Owners can set aside that difference and decide how much they want to spend when those expenses arise.

yahz, I'm starting to get the point. Thanks for hammering it into my slow brain

denlillaapan

I didn't say the opposite is true for new homeowners, specifically. There's a reason so many people are postponing moves that they would have made at lower interest rates.

Still, my point is that the renter pays those fees every month, regardless of need or service quality. Owners can set aside that difference and decide how much they want to spend when those expenses arise. Generally, this works like insurance, where renters pay more on average and pay consistently but can't be hit with a huge shock.

econ

Is It Better to Rent or Buy? (The Economist/SN Magazine)

I didn't say the opposite is true for new homeowners, specifically. There's a reason so many people are postponing moves that they would have made at lower interest rates.

Still, my point is that the renter pays those fees every month, regardless of need or service quality. Owners can set aside that difference and decide how much they want to spend when those expenses arise. Generally, this works like insurance, where renters pay more on average and pay consistently but can't be hit with a huge shock.