Fair enough, that was probably Whataboutism. I'll amend my argument: you say that because a landlord can afford to sell their property, they should not expect a tenant who can't pay rent to vacate. What happens to the tenant when the property is sold?

I own several rentals. I earned the money to buy them by living extremely frugally. I personally renovated them, at cost to time with my family, to improve the quality of life of my tenants. If one of my tenants (many of whom have nicer cars than me, nicer phones, etc) said that they expected me to cover their rent indefinitely because I "can afford it" I would take that very personally. I hope that you can understand my perspective here even if you don't agree with it. It's nice to think things like free internet access for all "should" exist, but "should" don't pay the bills. I'm not some faceless corporation with bottomless pockets. I'm another human being just like you. I'll happily cover a few months of rent during hard times. I have done so in the past and have offered it to my tenants during the current situation. But just because I think they "should" be covered when their income uncontrollably disappears doesnt mean Jack to my mortgage holder. Or the utility companies. Or my insurance provider.

I feel where you are coming from, but there are some hard truths that mold each of our decisions and they don't relent in the face of what we think should happen.