Asklemmy

44129 readers

480 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

124

Are there any occupations you uniquely oppose the existence of? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

124 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I did retirement home training and used to think it was a sweet job. Then I got in the business and underestimated how demoralizing it was as they give you the easy elders in training while the others make you, or at least me, really think of the fact the job just amounts to an unkarmic freebie.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

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

I'm staying in a city temporarily for about 6 months, whers would I live if I couldn't rent?

[–] SmilingSolaris 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The lack of a land lord does not mean the house disappeared off the planet.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yes but I'm not going to buy a house for 6 months just to sell it, it's not very feasible.

[–] SmilingSolaris 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The lack of a landlord also does not prevent you from temporarily using open housing either.

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

Wdym?

[–] SmilingSolaris 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Imagine a world where housing was given on a per-need basis. People still need to travel for work and stay for months at a time, except it's understood that the job getting done is more important than a landlord profiting off the fact you have to travel for it.

[–] reddit_sux 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Who maintains such supply of houses, who pays for it, who would own it, who would carry out repair works as and when they are needed.

[–] SmilingSolaris 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Landlords do not build housing, nor do they do repair work. So I'm gonna say the scarry trigger word for all you libertarians out there to gasp at. Gubberment.

[–] thesporkeffect 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Hotels used to be the standard temporary housing.

[–] finitebanjo 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

So basically only rich should be allowed to do extended travel? Since the supply of hotels would stay the same if rental homes weren't allowed, hotel rates wouldn't go down.