this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2024
1204 points (98.2% liked)

Political Memes

5602 readers
2657 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 4) 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 48 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (5 children)

thinking that homeless illegal immigrants are the root cause of home shortage where a single corporation or a billionaire buys thousands of flats to rent them to people for exorbitant prices.

in one way it works because if you kick out many homeless people out of the country, you can say that in one year you cut homelessness by half.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 68 points 2 months ago (11 children)

Neither choice is great. One is evil.

That 25k quickly becomes "oh, everyone had 25k more so we can charge 25k more".

Don't give rich house builders tax breaks, they're the ones causing the problem by deliberately not building enough. You're the fucking government. Build houses yourselves. Rent them through social housing programs.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago

Most builders are already fully booked for work. The one's that could work faster generally aren't the ones you want building your house.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 2 months ago (1 children)

dont allow corporations and billionaires to buy thousands of flats

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, that too.

The precious "free markets" have had their crack at it, and have shown that they're not to be trusted to either own or build them. Prices have soared and that's 100% intentional on their part.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I've started to come around on the 25k down payment assistance. It definitely has it's problems, and there will absolutely be those who gouge because of it. But because it's specifically down-payment assistance it will still help first time buyers get mortgages on houses they can afford the regular payments on, but don't have the extra to set aside for a 10% down payment because rent is taking everything they could be setting aside for a down payment. And it's limited to first time home buyers, with 2 years of on-time rent payments, and says "up to" 25k. Wouldn't surprise me if it ends up being limited to 10% of the purchase price (which gets you more favorable loan terms).

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

My wife and I only own our home because her wealthy dad was willing to front about half of the down payment with an interest-free repayment to him alongside the mortgage. With 25k from the government we'd not have needed that, and we got an acre in California. 25k is huge.

We've only ever had trouble with this mortgage once, and it was trouble we could have managed without help had we just tightened our belts for a while (just don't go to the ER. Even if you have insurance. Even if you're dying on the floor and an ex first responder demands you to for your safety: die instead. I am not joking, had it not been for familial help we'd be paying it off for the next 5 years and it would eat almost all of the little savings we've finally started managing to build up, so one more bump and we'd lose fucking everything), so it looks like all those "well sure you can afford rent that's 1.5x the cost of the potential mortgage, but how do we know you can afford it on the job you've had for 8 years?" Pricks were wrooooooooooong

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 38 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So the mass deportation would be of lawful alien residents, because undocumented residents cannot buy houses unless it is straight up cash, and even then would have a hard time getting insurance or utilities, you know, without a SSN, credit history or IDs. Unless they use a stolen SSN, which is very difficult and rare.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 months ago (1 children)

As usual, the blue choice is obviously much better than the red choice, but only in comparison to this bat shit crazy red choice. On it's own, the blue choice is still rather bad.

I'm starting to think that Republicans just exist to make the bad Democrat options look always better in comparison.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If you have one side that is pushing into the crazy territory really hard, the public discourse will change and shift in a way, that a moderate position will be perceived as extreme. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Your comment made me think of this spoken piece at the end of Anti-Police Aggro by Oi Polloi.

"Revolution isn't a thing that happens overnight. It's not a thing that - the orgasmic storming of Buckingham Palace and everything's all right in the morning, we've got a revolutionary society. We've got to realize that as things get harder - when we have a revolution, when we're headed towards a revolution things'll be harder still - and when we've obtained our revolution it doesn't stop - it continues on and on and on and on - It continues on until WE are the moderates. Right? When we are the moderates that's when we have a revolution. When ordinary people say "Anarchists? Ah, fuck - they're a load of fuckin liberals - they don't believe in revolution at all, ah, fuckin hell they're useless, like, you know" - Yeah, that's what I wanna see. That's what I'm fuckin' fighting for."

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

I'm curious how many houses/apartments are unused in the US, acting as a speculative asset and if building more is even necessary.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

If enough more houses are built that prices stop increasing faster than inflation, housing will no longer be valuable as a speculative asset. Building more houses BOTH makes housing immediately available, and changes the market forces in a way that pushes out investors squatting on un-lived-in units.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago

Building more is necessary if the available housing is not located where appropriate employment is located. Thus, the gross number of available homes isn't a good metric to use for determining the actual need for new construction.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The US has a population density of 33 people km2, But "Massss deportation!"

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (7 children)

The worst idea is ever giving down payment assistance. Government subsidizing actual builders, sure, but free money to property owners just increases the price to meet supply and demand and goes right into their pocket. It actually increases home prices. Extremely stupid.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (3 children)

It's more pointless than bad, I would think.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

I'm all for it of they include vacant land.. I wouldn't mind having acreage, and getting one of them unfinished Amazon houses.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 months ago

Of the four ideas that are listed on this picture that's the one you gonna go with for being the worst?

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 months ago

This is just to first time home buyers, not to anyone buying a house

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Bothesidezzz

[–] [email protected] 130 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Of course there's the best option which is an non-occupancy tax that goes up exponentially for each additional property you're sitting on for speculation.

That right there would be a hard counter to wallstreet hoovering in the housing market.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago (3 children)

That on top of a tax that is highly progressive after x number of properties, regardless of occupancies.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

If a landlord who actually takes their job as servant to their tenants seriously gets some efficiency of scale - say enough units to justify a full time maintenance person who is available on call to support tenant issues - I don't want to punish them for that. Surely we can develop metrics to identify predatory landlords that are more accurate than number of properties.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 55 points 2 months ago (4 children)

It's like you're not even considering the feelings of the millionaires and billionaires with 72 houses each and I for one just won't stand for it.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 76 points 2 months ago (1 children)

"Kill 3 kids and bulldoze the neighboring nature reserve (it won't give us more chairs, but it'll feel good)"

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago

its called a nature reserve because its a piece of nature thats reserved to be used as a golf course in the future

[–] [email protected] 38 points 2 months ago

Immigrants own Chase Manhattan?!!?!

Damn, lern somethin' new errday ...

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›