this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2024
1111 points (93.2% liked)

memes

9723 readers
2102 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
1111
The system is broken (lemmy.zip)
submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
264 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Someone who legitimately thinks "People will just replace houses with hotels" is not someone I'm going to look to for advice on this subject. Hotels are already more profitable for their owners than rental properties. If what you suggested was in any way feasible it would already be happening.

If you implement this, people will be living long term in hostels in 6 people dorms because the landlords are not required to live in them.

First, "This law that doesn't exist has a loophole" is a stupid argument. I'm not proposing the full legal text of the law, that would be for the government to figure out. Any imaginary loophole you come up they can also predict and not allow (include "hostel" on the list of properties the owner needs to also live on. Boom. Done.)

Second, you are suggesting people who currently live on their own will suddenly live in 6 person dorms. So what happened to those other 5 houses those people were living in? Are they also filled with 6 people dorms and we've magically created 6 times the population out of nowhere? Are they empty because they've been purchased by people who don't live there (you know, the entire problem here) who are now paying taxes on properties with no occupants until they are forced to sell?

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Why is my hypothetical disqualifying? A lot of people actually use their houses as hotels, it's called air bnb. It's pretty profitable to use the property like that

If you include the hostel owners to live in them, they will be converted into hotels that don't have that requirement. That's not my argument. My argument is permanent residents will be forced to live in hotels as apartment buildings get converted by their current owners who can't possibly live in all of their properties at the same time