this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2023
645 points (99.2% liked)

196

16801 readers
2682 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 79 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Ah yes because it's not the landlords it's the slumlords

Because there's a difference /s

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

One exploits the poor

The other exploits the middle class

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (2 children)

there is no lower class or middle class or upper class there's only working class and ruling class.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

But there's a continuum of varying degrees of passive income royalty between the two.

[–] ZagamTheVile 43 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Any minute now the study on whether or not rocks are hard is coming out too. Big week in science.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

There are bendy rocks, there aren't moral landlords.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago

Slumlords exploit the poor who live in slums, landlords exploit the middle class who live in slightly better buildings

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No true landlord would exploit the renter.

Those are slumlords. Which are mostly Scotsmen.

[–] dopeshark 24 points 1 year ago

Water is wet, new study finds

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There's the reason they call them BIG think. Truly next level.

But seriously is the study actually any good? Or the article?

[–] Sheeple 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No it's defending landlords and attempts to seperate between "Good innocent UwU landlords who provide good service" and "Slumlords"

[–] Maalus 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Which is the reality of renting, but saying that here will get you downvoted from people who don't like reality.

[–] Stovetop 1 points 1 year ago

Renting should cease to be a thing. At least on the scale it is nowadays.

More and more property is being gobbled up by landlords to rent out, leaving less and less space for new developments. There should be a hard cap on the number of rental units/dwellings a single person or company is allowed to own.

So long as we still live in a capitalist system, the idea of property ownership should not be left a fantasy for the majority of the younger generation. Everyone deserves the opportunity to reasonably acquire property that retains value, instead of tossing away all of their excess money in rent which just goes to make someone else richer.

[–] faceless 17 points 1 year ago

no fucking way

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

That is some crazy big thinking there, bud.

[–] Dasnap 8 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

What? No...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Someone is a landlord and doesn't like to think about the exploitative nature of rent-seeking, and is feeling guilty about it.