this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2024

1009 points (98.5% liked)

solarpunk memes

2954 readers

141 users here now

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

ex_06

tsugu

Track_Shovel

1009

don't hate the player, hate the game? (slrpnk.net)

submitted 2 months ago by stabby_cicada to c/memes

67 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 69 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (7 children)

Corps and foreign investors shouldn't be able to own housing (multi unit should be co-op/market rate nonprofits)
Individuals should not be able to own more than 5 homes. (The number is semi arbitrary, but at a certain point it is very clearly hoarding, and therefore shouldn't be allowed)
AirBNB and similar should be heavily regulated. (They turn permanent residences into short term, which reduces capacity, and drives up prices all around)
Shift to a land value tax system as the primary means of tax collection. What few landlords/scalpers exist after the above changes will have even less room to breathe. And it would punish vacancy, which would put pressure to keep as much housing available as possible.

There may need to be some exceptions. But if changes like this were to occur, we wouldn't have this problem.

[–] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 19 points 2 months ago (2 children)

No reason whatsoever anyone should own 5 "homes" (at that point they are not homes, they are a commodity).

Housing is a human right, and it needs to be entirely decommodified.

[–] stabby_cicada 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Preach.

Housing is a human right.

Private land ownership violates that human right.

All land should be held in trust for the people as a whole and managed by the government for the benefit of the people. Including the houses and apartments on that land.

We should not have private homeowners. We should not have private landlords. We should have socialized housing, just like we should have socialized medicine. Apartment buildings and neighborhoods should be managed by tenant associations, with strict legal limits on their authority over individual tenants, and government facilitators to provide expert advice on building management and keep meetings running smoothly.

But we are a long way from implementing that.

[–] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I think I would swap the word government for collective, but otherwise I completely agree, and yeah, we're a long way away unfortunately. But we can hope, and inform others, and join/invest in projects that are working towards that end!

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The government should be the collective. The fact that it isn't is one of the roots of the problem, and the FPTP electoral systems of most western countries keeps it that way.

[–] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

I don't disagree, but I do think the anarchist idea of a government (which is what I personally had in mind) is so far removed from what most people today can envisage when they hear that word, that it's still worth differentiating.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

But consider all the investment banks that would irreparably harm!

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Each successive property beyond one should add an additional 10% to the property taxes. The owner may list them in any order, but you pay 110% for the second property and 200% for the 11th

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

A land value tax would be a good idea as well, especially if its the main form of tax collection. Each successive property would automatically, drastically increase the cost.

It would become a defacto tax on the rich, while helping to prevent hoarding. Two birds one stone.

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago (3 children)

...And the net result would be that they would charge more on rent. And since taxing at higher rates would deter people from building more rental properties, the housing shortage would get worse.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And since taxing at higher rates would deter people from building more rental properties, the housing shortage would get worse.

Housing is a public good and should be funded as such.

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That would be great! Except that cities refuse to do that, and no one wants to put high density housing anywhere near their cute, historic neighborhood.

If you can build the political will to steamroll the NIMBYs, I'm all for it.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If you can build the political will to steamroll the NIMBYs, I’m all for it.

Any solution to the housing crisis necessarily would require the political will to do that. There's no getting around it.

But yeah, I think we more or less reached a point of agreement. We need to change the culture, it must become more collectivist. We gotta finally start caring for one another.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Developers are not generally landlords. They want to build and are fully capable of setting up building co-ops. (They already do it) So fucking with landlords does not in any way mean less housing available.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (6 children)

Fine. Cap the rents and tie them to inflation. These fuckers are greedier than literal dragons, and I'm down for some dragon slaying.

load more comments (6 replies)

[–] Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 2 months ago (2 children)

An easier approach would be to turn every apartment building into a housing co-op.

Capitalist for-profit housing simply should not exist.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] makyo@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I'd even say no more than two properties. Make people apply for a permit to own more than that and put extreme limits on the reasons they could be successful depending on the current market.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

I don't have a problem with that either. But yeah, the number itself is semi arbitrary. It should be voted on really.

[–] blanketswithsmallpox@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

The vast majority of 'good' landlords are people who were sketchy about investing in stock markets. As they rightfully should be because it requires infinite growth to keep people retiring without serious wage redistribution. But let's kick that football down the road more.

Most of them are old and elderly. There's no way the government forces private land owners to sell off anytime soon though. Let alone the difference in taxing/sales of land ownership vs home ownership. A hard cap on total homes owned would be nice though. People really out to diversify their savings and equity is a huge one.

There's so much good that could be done that starts failing when defacto mini government coops start up though. You'll have a hard time finding the difference between Coop and government owned housing but you'll see people lambast government ownership like we've already seen in this thread lol.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 36 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Not pictured, all the landlords paying an app to create a higher market rate.

[–] stabby_cicada 22 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It boggles my mind how people still insist there's a "free market" in rent when we have proof of giant property management corporations colluding nationwide to raise rents.

This shit is why we need rent control.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 31 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Investors and Airbnb have really undermined historical market forces here. also data pricing apps that fix prices between "competitors" should be noted here

[–] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 30 points 2 months ago (2 children)

One landlord told me he had to charge so much because of his Asian wife was greedy.

Glad that old white landlord can hide is greed behind his racism for his wife's ethnic background.

Rich people are shit people.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

"I'mma need to be greedy with you because my wife is asian" AKA why capitalists will always side with racism even if its a transparent attempt to bilk people of money.

[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

What people don't seem to credit enough is the fact that nearly all wealthy people are shitty people. I'm not being facetious. I know a lot of them, and they almost universally believe that they earned every penny of their fortunes.

The rest of us are just lazy. That's how they see everything. Some break the mold, sure... But the grand majority are trash people.

[–] absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz 10 points 2 months ago (8 children)

Nice!

The person in this post is Chris Luxon, the current NZ Prime Minister.

This was posted to Lemmy.NZ a while back see

load more comments (8 replies)

[–] gilbert31@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

Just build more housing lol

[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 months ago

Funny how they never mind raising the rent when the market is up, but you never, ever, ever get it lowered when it's down.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Imagine a hoard of people saying that in a drone similar to "this is extremely dangerous to our democracy".

[–] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 5 points 2 months ago

[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

the players are the game. never forget that

[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

I hate the player and the game. After all why not both?

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

[–] Mobiledecay@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

That's one well dressed landlord. Every landlord I ever dealt wore dirty clothes, was missing teeth, and was in desperate need of a shower. 🤔

load more comments