this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2025
2062 points (97.1% liked)
A Boring Dystopia
11600 readers
926 users here now
Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.
Rules (Subject to Change)
--Be a Decent Human Being
--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title
--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article
--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.
--Posts must have something to do with the topic
--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.
--No NSFW content
--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Dude, they explained perfectly well how they ended up with two houses. 2 people had houses, they got married and only needed one. They weren’t preying on people, it just happened to them.
If they sold it they’d be scumbag real estate agents, since we’re apparently taking everything to extremes.
Well apparently renting one out is to you, I’m just following your logic.
So, like, tear down all the apartment buildings and focus on putting every single human in a single family home for free? Like, how does your mental image of this work?
Agreed that the current administration is a dumpster fire and they will likely just burn HUD to the ground.
There are really only two options for housing. Either a single family home or a multiple dwelling unit.. apartments/duplexes and the like. I'm not sure what alternatives you're thinking of. For a MDU, someone has to own the property, and they will be responsible for its upkeep and any financial obligations. Perhaps a co-op might work, but there is nothing stopping anyone from doing that now, and almost no one does it.
Suggesting the government nationalize a property rental corporation is insane. It sounds like a good way to ruin our society when businesses flee for fear of being nationalized as well. If you think that sounds like a good idea, look at countries that have done this and ask yourself if YOU would want to live there. Any other anti-trust action would be much more appropriate. Certainly, it won't happen in the next four years, but if we have another election, taking down rental conglomerates would probably be insanely popular.
As for the 15 million vacant homes, read this: https://www.forbes.com/sites/brendarichardson/2022/03/07/16-million-homes-lie-empty-and-these-states-are-the-vacancy-hot-spots/
The majority of homes that remain vacant over long periods of time tend to be undesirable and cheaper. A question you could ask is, why don't people move to where the affordable homes are? Because they don't want to live there. They want to have affordable housing in the same place everybody else wants to live. People compete to live in more desirable areas, driving the prices up. Now housing is too expensive for people of lower incomes. How would you suggest we lower property costs in places like New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco?
Its not a matter of having to search for housing types. By referencing apartments, condos, duplexes, you're referencing multi dwelling units with extra steps. I see no point in making the distinction between them. In each case, either one or none of the families in those types of residences own the actual building. Even with a condo, where you do not make a monthly payment on the dwelling itself, you still owe rent, maintenance, HOA fees, whatever you want to call it... to the evil building owner.
On that page, as you say, most of the businesses nationalized in western countries are railways and utilities. You'll find that at least most of these businesses were nationalized because the business itself was failing. Amtrak is a key example of this. US passenger rail lines were going out of business, and the government offered to BUY all the passenger services in the country so the rail lines could focus on more profitable cargo. The end result was Amtrak. What I don't see on that list, are any western countries that nationalized a business because it was making too much money.
When I think of my internal biases against countries like Venezuela, China, and Russia... No, I don't think I will.
Forbes is not a good source? I would ask you to justify that, but I don't really care. I don't care about Forbes either. They are allegedly as center-biased as Reuters, AP, and the BBC though. Perhaps you might want to reconsider your internal biases? Feel free to offer up your own article explaining why the nationwide housing market is in the state it's in.
Your argument was about housing affordability and price gouging, and then referenced that 15 million vacant homes statistic to make your point. My counterpoint is that many of those vacant homes are affordable, people just don't want to live in them for a variety of reasons. Perhaps you should find a statistic that talks about vacant homes in places where people want to live. Or, perhaps you could find a statistic that actually makes your point such as how many homes are available for purchase vs for rent where people actually want to live.
Housing vouchers... So you want to take government money and give that to the landlords rather than do something about the cost or availability of housing?
If you want to end the conversation, you're welcome to not respond.
Congratulations, being so knowledgeable about real estate. Enjoy the dopamine hit. I have never been able to afford a condo, and not working in that industry, I had forgotten that condo associations exist. I know what an HOA is, my home falls under one.
I don't understand nationalization? You don't appear capable of conveying your arguments without falling back on lists of things, like buses, airlines, banks, ferries, and so on. You're also really focused on how intelligent you think you are, and how unintelligent you think I am. Enjoy those happy thoughts. With as intellectual as you are, somehow you missed the point of my previous argument: The reason for the nationalization is what matters. I certainly didn't "ignore the rest", as I even pointed out a specific instance of a nationalization being good for the businesses and the public. However, simply nationalizing a business because it makes too much money is a terrible idea. If you want to argue otherwise, then point out a specific instance in history where such a nationalization occurred and where businesses did not start leaving the country as a result, and then provide the Wikipedia link to back up your argument so I can go read the background on it myself. Don't just lazily give me a link to a Wikipedia article and expect me to find your counterargument for you.
Forbes is corporate propaganda. Cool story. If their article is factually wrong about the housing market, provide a counterargument about the housing market with a reference.
I can't read?
That is awfully nonspecific and fanciful language. If you have something specific which is supposed to follow housing vouchers, I'm curious to know what it is. Bonus points if this plan results in something better than government housing projects of the past.
Disingenuous. You keep using this word, but I don't think it means what you think it means.
That one's free. If I am not being candid, or sincere, or pretending to know less about something, please explain how. You keep insulting my intelligence though, so an explanation of how I am pretending to be even more stupid than I allegedly already am will be an entertaining read.
Yeah but what if they ebded up separating with their partner? It just made sense to keep the property. Renting it out just covered the cost and made sure it was not empty.
Yeah I really did type that out you bastard. It's their fucking property. They could have left it empty. Having a property is just housing safety.
They as a couple had multiple properties yes. But as individuals before moving in together each had 1. And rhat is oerfectly fine. Nobody expects you to immediately sell your property when you move in with someone.
How do you live alone in a fucking house?
That doesn't change the fact they aren't normal people. Most people would love the hope of ever owning one house in America, as a dual income household, much less two single people who are rich enough to have their own homes.
So what, they should just give their house away for free?
They rented it out to their friends for like half of what a similar place would cost. Then they sold it after their friend moved out. Not seeing how that's so morally reprehensible. You honestly just seem like someone who is jealous of someone else and so are shitting on them to feel better. And even if they did sell, if everyone is someone they can't afford a house, seems more likely a landlord would buy it anyway.
Can you explain to me how this dude renting out his property to a friend for half price is causing homelessness?
I didn't say I was okay with homelessness. I'm just saying that you are picking the wrong type of person to criticize over this. There are huge companies that own thousands of houses. Foreign companies and individuals that own hundreds. I knew a lady that had like 20 properties. Those are the people causing the problem. Not some dude who charged way lower than the normal rent and then sold a few years later. Also, nothing about what I said warranted the way you're acting. Never insulted you once.
All good bro. Shits tense right now
So far all you've done is lash out at everyone and swear. You have no compassion. You just have anger.
You just come off as unhinged is all. Doubt the guy you initially responded to voted for Trump and neither did I since I don't live in that country. Neither of us are your enemy yet you treat us like it. You need to chill out and be more patient with people who you're trying to convince of something.
I feel you. He's been threatening my country for a few months. Hate the fucking piece of shit.
So what is the proper method in your mind?
Privatization of shelter as in home ownership?
Still not following
Oh okay I see.
Yeah fuck that guy for being born early enough to be able to buy an $80k house via mortgage