• bluGill
    link
    fedilink
    -321 year ago

    That is a bad idea as owning a house isn’t right for everyone.

    • Koro
      link
      39
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      While that may be, companies should not be able to have a stronghold on what should be considered a basic human need. Housing is already in pretty short supply, and it’s worsened by the fact that these companies buy a considerable chunk of this short supply and then turn the purchased properties into rentals.

      • @SCB
        link
        -161 year ago

        “buying one home and turning it into 4 home reduces the amount of homes” and other fun takes.

        • Koro
          link
          51 year ago

          “Buying a house and renting it out to families that were wanting to buy it outright in the first place” FTFY

          • @SCB
            link
            -21 year ago

            Oh I’m sorry, do 4 families generally get together and purchase a house as a collective?

        • deejay4am
          link
          31 year ago

          “Buying one home and charging 4x as much for it” is the actual problem, but I suppose you have your head in the sand by default when the large boot of capitalism is on your neck.

          • @SCB
            link
            -3
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Strong disagree. People having homes where they otherwise would not is a feature, not a bug.

            If you want prices down, you must increase supply

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      291 year ago

      The idea being proposed here doesn’t outlaw renting, only corporate ownership of residential property. It means that the people you’re renting from are human beings who will eventually die and either be estate taxed or the house will be sold, rather than a corporation who owns your property until they go bankrupt or until the sun explodes.

      • @MajorHavoc
        link
        10
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Bingo. A lot of current problems get better by:

        A) 100% death tax on all money over 100,000,000.00 at time of death.

        B) Closing loopholes that allow hiding that kind of money in unnecessary corporate assets or non-charitable trusts.

        C) Cracking down on what qualifies as a charitable trust. Want to leave that money to trust that makes the world better, better have numbers to prove it or it gets disolved automatically into other more effective charities.

        D) Automatically splitting every corpportation the moment it crosses a reasonable value threshold.

    • Hextic
      link
      17
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Fuck you you shouldn’t own a goddamn thing with that mentality.

      You bootlickers are the reason shit is bad and was always bad.

      • @andrewta
        link
        -141 year ago

        Solid intelligence response there

        • @RubberElectrons
          link
          181 year ago

          Parse their response, instead of just the tone. That person’s mad and sad both at how tough living has become.

        • @DaveFuckinMorgan
          link
          11 year ago

          We’ve all had that one lazy piece of shit roomate that never cleans up after himself and I bet it’s him.

    • circuitfarmer
      link
      fedilink
      21 year ago

      Lol no one gets forced to buy one just because prices become realistic, wth