1380
Happy Labour Day to people who are not landlords. (lemmy.world)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/memes@lemmy.ml
412 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 3 years ago (21 children)

Not everyone is able or willing to own their property, what would they do if landlords didn't exist?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 3 years ago (17 children)

    Privatizing the right to have shelter is pretty scummy to be a thing to exist.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (7 children)

    What if I build a house on a piece of land I own and want to rent it out?

    The second construction is completed I'm all of a sudden a scumbag for privatizing someone else's right to shelter? Even though it's a house I built on my land? Doesn't make much sense to me.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    Why would you build a house and not live in it?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    As I stated in the very first sentence: to rent it out.

    I suppose your response will be "but renting it out is bad! We should make that illegal because you're extracting wealth from the tenant!"

    Then I will say to you "fine, I suppose I will not build that house at all"

    This is how you get a take a housing shortage in the US and make it far, far worse.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    You're moving the goal posts here. Did you buy the land for the purpose of building property? Bad. Did you convert arable land into housing? Bad. Was it a rocky bad piece of land that you invested in to build something more out of it? Good. Housing policy isn't binary but in most cases the current personal private multiownership model doesn't help anyone. My perspective is no one should be allowed to own more than one house, and if so anything beyond the first house should be heavily taxed.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    Buying land for the purpose of building property is bad? I think any policy that discourages development of additional housing is probably not going to be great for house prices. Or if you're handing out houses in a lottery system, it won't be great for housing supply at least.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -2 points 3 years ago

    I'll give you an example; my country has food insecurity, rich people take arable farmland and build suburbs on that land instead of infilling the city downtown which has single detached homes less than a kilometre from the centre of the city. Do you think that this is a good thing they're buying this farmland for suburbs, or a bad thing?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (8 children)

    So they would still have a landlord it would be the government instead and people would be pissed when the government increases rent or throws people out because they're destroying the place or not paying their rent...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago (7 children)

    I'd much prefer to have social housing than slumlords that want to make a profit on the rented space while also keeping the value of the building.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (6 children)

    So, how does the government decide who gets beachfront property and who lives behind the power plant?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [+] -7 points 3 years ago (5 children)

    The same way that it works now? The unit is for rent, you take an appointment and the first person that qualifies get it.

    This is not the gotcha you think it is. What so different than the current system?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    If nothing is different, why bother changing?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (3 children)

    Because the government wouldn't be trying to bleed every penny out of tenants just because they can.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    That's some alternative reality, you're talking about. My government does try, and succeeds in bleeding every last penny that I earn.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 years ago

    Make it illegal to rent out property you don't live on.

    If you want to rent out your basement, or build a seperate dwelling on your property then you are adding to the available housing and can rent that. Most people would rather build their own equity given the chance, and this would provide rentals for temporary living situations.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent