An excerpt from the article:
Ms. Jones has been scouring the West Los Angeles rental market to find a house that the family could rent for the next eight months, or longer. On Friday morning, she noticed something disturbing on the rents of at least three of the properties she had been tracking: 15 to 20 percent increases overnight.
The sudden surge in rental costs took Ms. Jones by surprise, but aligned with what she has noticed since wildfires started to tear through the Los Angeles area on Tuesday. Ms. Jones was touring a rental house in Beverly Hills with her client on Thursday when the listing agent raised the monthly cost by $3,000 — on the spot. Agents and landlords are aware that some displaced Angelenos might be willing to pay given the circumstance.
“People are so panicked and desperate to get into a house right now that they’re just throwing money into the wind,” Ms. Jones said. “People taking advantage of this. It’s horrendous.”
And now, totally unrelated to this, the definition of “parasitism”:
Association between two different organisms wherein one benefits at the expense of the other.
They’re talking about a rental house, and in LA of all places
Everyone is in the same rental hellscape - you can sympathize with people being exploited even if they’re in a different tax bracket than you. Have some class consciousness, jesus
Class consciousness? Last I checked, a 3-4 bedroom rental house in the LA area has plenty of options in the $4k to $8k range.
Here’s a few examples for you.
Zillow doesn’t even have a “price minimum” filter option greater than $10k a month.
The article specifically states some rental properties were increased, and the only example they gave was a property in a range that literally 99% of the population can’t afford. Is the 1% now suddenly in the same class that I need to be conscious about?
Class is about labor relations, not income.
At best those people are petty bourgeois, but they are still renting in this case, so still being exploited by a capitalist. By any marxist interpretation they’d still be working-class.
I don’t disagree with you at all.
My comment assumed that they’re making enough to own passive income properties that they rent to people who don’t own properties, which is not uncommon amongst those making enough to afford that kind of rent.
Renting doesn’t make you part of the proletariat if you own private property that gives you money without working.
However, it’s definitely presumptuous of me to make such assumptions about who they are and what they own, as much as it is of you to assume that they are part of the labor force and aren’t just wealthy investment bankers, so I won’t belabor the point.
Maybe, but there is clearly someone in this situation that is exploiting their position as a capital owner, and it isn’t the renters.
Neither will I belabor the point about presuming high earners to be a part of the bourgeoisie.