Why is the flag of Chile used for China?
this post was submitted on 22 Dec 2024
113 points (86.9% liked)
Socialism
5305 readers
13 users here now
Rules TBD.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
They goofed.
Oh Garretts, that’s Chile’s 🇨🇱 flag, not China’s 🇨🇳.
this misses an important point i think.
in germany people live for a very long time in the same rented apartment. 20-30 years is common, as i understand it. homeownership is not seen as a "goal". i think adding an axis for tenancy length would be useful.
Literally nobody I know is happy renting. They've all just accepted they can't afford buying.
In Germany a lot of people can afford a mortgage, but they choose not to buy. It's in part culture and fear of commitment, in part a need for high mobility within the country.
In Spain at least, a lot of ppl live in what looks like highrise apartment buildings, but many are actually condos owned out right. I'm surprised that's not more of the case in France and Germany, just letting landlords gobble up real estate like the US.
What is the difference between a condo and a highrise ?
A highrise just means any tall building, with enough floors to make an elevator required.
Housing highrise buildings can either have apartments for rent, or condos sold outright (usually with some kind of a homeowners association that takes care of utilities, trash, etc that you have to pay recurring fees to).
In my country (the US), highrise condos exist but are much rarer than every other form of housing. In Spain I saw a lot of highrise condo buildings, some of the condos even had two floors. Imagine a mansion inside of a highrise building, pretty neat.
Spain is a lot like the big cities of India than. I have recently seen ads for duplex highrise apartments here as well, but prohibitively expensive for me.
It is a goal as far as I can tell from my social environment. It's just financially unachievable for most of them and me. Heck, my brother-in-law works at VW in a rather high up position and still says it's not realistic to them. At least not without moving to a different state.
Might also have something to do with tenants having so many rights that they just don't have many of the disadvantages they'd have in other countries.
Here in sweden at least, even a second hand renting contract is not that much worse than owning your home. And if you have a first hand contract with a municipal landlord i would argue it's the best form of housing you can have, in large part because you just don't have to do anything other than pay the oftentimes quite low rent. No need to perform maintenance and stuff.
Wonder what their criteria for adding a country was.
If it was just all the highest, Norway should be on there with 76.3%
https://www.ssb.no/bygg-bolig-og-eiendom/bolig-og-boforhold/statistikk/boforhold-registerbasert
China is in south America?
I didn't know China was using the same flag as Chile
86.6% looks too high for India.
Yeah, it's probably misreporting and probably also, "well they have a tiny hut for all members of the family in this god forsaken village while being stuck in eternal poverty, but that's enough to call it a house"
India is often dishonest with their data. Many politicians will lie to save face. But even if the numbers are "real", it's worth asking yourself what they are considering a home. Plenty of people live in scrap houses on land they don't own, are they "homeowners" in this data. India has squatters rights, if they can't be removed from someone else's property they've lived in for decades are they "homeowners" in this data? If someone's has a live in servant who has a separated house on their property, are they "homeowners"? My guess is that india is defining homeowners very loosely.
It'd be worth looking into their source there.
I think with "awas" yojnas more homeowners are there
In Spain, the rate has decreased 4 points in 10 years:
Blue line: 30-44 years old. Green line: total.
Is it fair to call a 70 year lease from the government “ownership”?
Nobody "owns" land. Even under capitalism. If you think you do, stop paying the ~~rent~~ tax you pay the government in order to "own" that land and see what happens.
Point is, even if you "own" a house, if the government decides they want to confiscate it, they have a whole army to do it. All ownership is always at the mercy of the government. (More accurately, ownership is at the mercy of whoever has the monopoly on violence, since they can only take ownership through it.)
Just curious - what happens after that 70 years is up? I get to keep my property in perpetuity and pass it down generations as long as I pay my taxes. Is there any such guarantee in China?
"...if the government decides they want to confiscate it, they have a whole army to do it."
This feels pretty random to include. Did I miss something? Has the army been kicking people out of homes lately?
The downvotes without comments to support the criticism speaks volumes.
I think people here have this dream picture of China or something but that country seems to get the shit end of both sticks when it comes to housing. Expensive housing driven by a capitalist development framework and no guarantees to support to investment into the real estate you buy. That’s why Chinese citizens with money actually invest in real estate outside of China.
Other than the set duration, all ownership is at the government's pleasure everywhere. Luckily, in a lot of places governments serve at the pleasure of voters.
Ooof, the Middle East is probably 99%. But socialism baaaaaad, right?
Not a very useful measure if a country has cheap and reliable publicly owned rental apartments. I would prefer rental because it's easier to leave.