Ah yes because it's not the landlords it's the slumlords
Because there's a difference /s
this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2023
640 points (100.0% liked)
196
16245 readers
2419 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
One exploits the poor
The other exploits the middle class
there is no lower class or middle class or upper class there's only working class and ruling class.
There is still a massive difference between poor people living in slums and people with comfortable, but not ridiculously high income living in a better area.
This is true, but only if you leave out the upper band of the comparison range.
It's like saying that there's a massive difference between the size of a rice grain and the size of a loaf of bread, but leave out the literal planet in comparison.
But there's a continuum of varying degrees of passive income royalty between the two.
Any minute now the study on whether or not rocks are hard is coming out too. Big week in science.
There are bendy rocks, there aren't moral landlords.
Slumlords exploit the poor who live in slums, landlords exploit the middle class who live in slightly better buildings
No true landlord would exploit the renter.
Those are slumlords. Which are mostly Scotsmen.
Water is wet, new study finds
There's the reason they call them BIG think. Truly next level.
But seriously is the study actually any good? Or the article?
no fucking way
That is some crazy big thinking there, bud.
What? No...
Someone is a landlord and doesn't like to think about the exploitative nature of rent-seeking, and is feeling guilty about it.