Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

tye1984 t1_j99djbp wrote

Reply to comment by EnbyKathryn in Who's the worst landlord in Springfield? by strangemud

Oh bullshit. There are plenty that take care of their property

8

jaydub1001 t1_j9ah0j5 wrote

Yes, but they ARE parasites on society. We don't actually need them for society to run. They provide housing the way a scalper provides tickets. Scalpers and landlords are parasites.

22

CADOMA t1_j9k5gk1 wrote

I hear this a lot. Rental housing is a business like any other. Owning a house isn't always an option for people. What is the alternative? Do we strip people of their property and hand it to people who often don't want or can't afford it? Tear down all the apartments in the world or force people into an obligation to own a place they might want to leave soon? I think it could be better regulated but it's better than any alternative I've heard, but those alternatives are few and far between because it's easier to tear something down then to build something new.

2

jaydub1001 t1_j9k6l8b wrote

>Rental housing is a business like any other

It isn't. It's far from selling fruits and vegetables in a market. If I don't like the cost of bread at my local market, I can search around and find one for a dollar cheaper, perhaps. Housing is predatory. You NEED housing. Without it, you are not considered part of human society in any meaningful way. So, companies buy up property and jack up the prices. The market doesn't need landlords.

>Do we strip people of their property and hand it to people who often don't want or can't afford it?

Who doesn't want a home? Lol, tf?

>Tear down all the apartments in the world or force people into an obligation to own a place they might want to leave soon?

Ah, because the only alternative is to bulldoze them? Why not socialize the housing market? If I'm going to pay taxes, and I do, I want it to go towards helping people. Cut funding from the military and police forces and give people a place to live.

>I think it could be better regulated but it's better than any alternative I've heard, but those alternatives are few and far between because it's easier to tear something down then to build something new.

People don't want to listen to the socialized housing solution because they are scared of it, for some reason.

2

CADOMA t1_j9ktngp wrote

I love how long this response is without answering the question.

It cost me 10k to replace my HVAC. Let that sink in. That was why I avoided buying a home for years. Who shoulders that cost in your utopia?

I really want to know how the logistics of building an equitable free housing market. Because these are the issuea i came up with in about 5 minutes of thought.

Is maintenance covered in the cost of housing in your world?

Who gets the really nice house's? Is there some sort of lottery were unlucky people get shit? Or are we just talking about building Cabrini Green everywhere.

What happens to all of the existing rental properties? Do we buy them or just steal them from owners?

How do you deal with places like California where the citizens vote time and time again to stop multi home structure construction. The housing market there is garbage because the people won't allow apartments to be built.

Who gets Free housing? Do you have to qualify?

What happens to Airbnb?

I suspect this is why the most progressive countries in the world haven't adopted this concept. It's far better to regulate the rental business. The US does this poorly. Take more control and give it to the renters. Make sure that certain protections are enforced by law. Making it impossible for slumlords to profit or exist.

Also a basic income for those who need it would help retain the power of choice.

3

jaydub1001 t1_j9kvcq7 wrote

I see you have a lot of questions. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to answer them. It seems, however, you may be interested in finding them and you're not arguing in bad faith. If that's the case, I'd search for those answers from someone more knowledgeable than myself. Most of your questions are "who pays for it" and the answer is simple: we all do. We are already (most of us) paying for housing. What if we took away the investment aspect of it? Prices drop.

It shouldn't be a commodity and it should be a human right to be housed.

The other questions are about what to do with all the other properties. Well, I'm not sure. But, if you own the home you're living in then nothing should change. If you own 500 homes, then too bad.

1

mb10240 t1_j9av0nz wrote

Oh, that’s not what the poster is implying. They’re implying that it is wrong to buy property and rent it back for profit because they’re a commie.

−6