329
WeWork founder remains a billionaire even with firm’s bankruptcy | The Straits Times (www.straitstimes.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/aboringdystopia@lemmy.world
48 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] 91 points 2 years ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (6 children)
[deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 54 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    No single word in the English vocabulary grates against me more than when I hear owners of residential property refer to it as "units".

    It's so dehumanizing. Rather, it's monetizing humanity.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You can't spell humanity without unit after all.

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

    You might want to inspect those words again

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

    Reminds me of "human resources". My experiences with HR have also been largely negative. They're there to protect and make sure the humans are a resource to the company, not for the humans and humanity.

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

    I agree with the spirit of your comment, and I would only add that the practical implementation may need to allow for some leniency.

    For instance, you shouldn't be forced to sell and buy elsewhere if your life circumstances change temporarily. The law in general could allow for renting somewhere and renting out elsewhere. But I would be onboard with the overall intent of such regulation.

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

    Just build more houses.

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

    We have like 10 empty houses for every person experiencing homelessness. How many more do we need to build?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [+] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    There's plenty of room even in places like Venezia (source: I was living there). Problem is they are mostly empty because the rich oligarchs bought as an investment and keeps them there empty. This is also compounded by the scourge that is Airbnb that is pricing out everyone.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -10 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Residentjal property shouldn't be allowed to be an investment. Or heavily taxed to make it unprofitable unless you live there yourself.

    Why would anyone build new apartment buildings if that were the law? We desperately need to be building more housing, and denser housing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    They'd build them so they can sell them. You can own apartments too.

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

    So everyone needs to be able to spend the upfront capital to buy a home? What about people who want to rent? There are lots of advantages to not buying.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The advantages you mention are a result of inflated values. Your parents generations could much more easily buy a property and decide to sell it within a few years to move somewhere else.

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

    Loans exist. And reduce the upfront cost in paperwork to buying a house. It shouldn't cost nearly 5 figures just to get documents signed.

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

    So instead of paying rent, you pay loan payments. And the bank can seize your property if you can't pay. Sounds like six of one and a half-dozen of the other.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You're still thinking within the current broken system. The only reason the bank can seize everything unfairly no matter how much had been repaid is because the laws allow it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    Even if you ignore foreclosure, mortgaging still is often more expensive than renting on average in the short term. Because part of what you're paying for in a mortgage is the fact that it has a finite length.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Rent keeps going up, my mortgage is the same regardless of that and I purchased based on what I could afford at that time.

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

    Mortgage payments build equity and when you move you can sell the property and recoup nearly all of that. Rent is gone.

    Foreclosure is a huge issue that needs to be addressed in legislation. All that equity should still exist for the homeowner even if they stop being able to afford payments.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent