this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2024
1290 points (96.9% liked)

Memes

45399 readers
1299 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 94 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

CAPITAL-ism is aimed and designed to benefit those with the capital.

[–] ThatGiantCameron@lemmy.world 44 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I hate this about our system. To combat this i am sharing equity with the guy that rents a room. I'm tracking how much his rent payments go to paying off the mortgage (which I can make myself, it's just a larger house with rooms to spare) he will get a check based off the percent he paid off on sale, or a percentage of revenue if we end up keeping and paying it off years later. Finance people think I'm crazy giving up that much equity. I just hated tossing rent money to the void, so I figured now that I'm in a position to change my little corner of the world, I will.

[–] Zink@programming.dev 31 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The finance people (and sadly, many many others) think making the number bigger is a more important and worthwhile goal than making your corner of the world a better place. So good on you for being a compassionate human!

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It doesn't matter what individuals think in the system, the system moves regardless because if they don't take advantage of it, others will and will supercede them. In this manner, Capital functions almost like a god that is actually worshipped.

Individuals being compassionate within a horrible system will not influence the system overall, though it doesn't mean compassion isn't worth it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AeonFelis@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Have you consulted with a lawyer about this? The laws differ from place to place, but I'd be worried the equity you give him may also grant him some sort of claim on the house, which would mean he gets a say on financial things related to the real estate. This can complicate things in the future.

Also - what does "percentage of revenue if we end up keeping and paying it off years later" mean? That after he leaves you will pay him for his share in your house?

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Rich people who lived simply, "not underdeveloped, over exploited."

The bananas were a nice touch. It's sickening how politicians are using terms like "banana republic" divorcing them from actual meaning. I almost said, "and kangaroo court," but caught myself, before typing "court," since for a lot of North Americans struggling for any justice get that, for instance the college protesters.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 68 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Elmo: Let me introduce you to the revolutionary who taught me all this.

*knocks on trash can

[–] v_krishna@lemmy.ml 26 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm not sure if this is an Oscar reference or a Zizek reference and either way I'm here for it.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

I like to think you'd find both of them inside the trashcan of ideology.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Disgracefulone@discuss.online 51 points 1 month ago (7 children)

Great theory until you get removed from your home trying to make a point because the family of 3 with nowhere else to go doesn't have the luxury of caring about things like this thanks to the broke ass system we all reside in.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (9 children)

Great theory until you get removed from your home trying to make a point

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent_strike

When you get the whole building involve, it can be surprisingly effective.

the family of 3 with nowhere else to go doesn’t have the luxury of caring about things like this

You don't think a family of 3 cares when their rents double over five years while their wages barely budge?

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] TheOubliette@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 month ago

It is virtually impossible to work individually against landlords. Instead, form or join a tensnts' union. And maybe some orgs opposed to landlordism.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 37 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I mean, this is how businesses work in general. If you don't buy their products/services, then they wouldn't be able to continue providing them.

I understand that we're trying to draw attention to exploitative landlords, but if anyone can afford to keep their property regardless of whether or not you pay rent, it's the exploitative ones.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 30 points 1 month ago (51 children)

The problem is that landlords don't create value, they seek to endlessly profit off of one time labor. Rent-seeking creates no real Value of any substance.

[–] Antiproton@programming.dev 13 points 1 month ago (6 children)

That's the naivete of the Internet talking. Of course landlords create value; they do so in exactly the same way lenders create value: they absorb risk by amortizing upfront costs and charge a premium to do so.

If you didn't agree that it's an ethical way to participate in the economy, say that. Don't try to pass off a moral judgment as an objective truth.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 21 points 1 month ago (10 children)

There's no Value created by risk, that's an ad-hoc justification for profiting endlessly off of labor performed one time long ago.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Catsrules@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 month ago (4 children)

They do create value. They provide maintenance free housing as well as short term housing (short term as in 1-3 years.) Not everyone wants to stay in the same location for 5+ years. If you move around alot It you want to rent is usually the better option.

Now sure you could argue they are over charging for that service but that doesn't mean they aren't providing value.

The only reason why we are having issues is because there is a housing shortage that is raising the price and large companies have taken advantage of this by buying up all the houses at the crazy price and renting them out at crazy rent prices eating up the market for actual people to want to buy a house.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 month ago (2 children)

They do create value. They provide maintenance free housing as well as short term housing (short term as in 1-3 years.) Not everyone wants to stay in the same location for 5+ years. If you move around alot It you want to rent is usually the better option.

The ability to rent is useful, but the idea that endlessly profiting off of the same property and doing minor maintenance is creating Value is silly. There's no Value being created through simply owning something. Maintenance creates Value, yes, but that does not make up anywhere close to the profit of landlording.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] roguetrick@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago

No. It's not large companies. It's a sickness inherent in the system and exactly what this is taking about. The only service being provided is leveraging their own credit to get a mortgage from the bank and then paying that mortgage and taxes with rent. They do that because it will decrease supply and increase value. And that's a parasitic practice done not just by large companies by any means. In my city they even subcontract for maintenance and also pay for that out of the rent. If we're doing this shit, why exactly aren't we just letting the renters own their equity for paying the goddamn mortgage. It's a disgusting system.

[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 1 month ago (7 children)

They provide maintenance free housing...

Keep in mind this isn't always the case. Landlords where I used to live are increasingly requiring tenants to pay for some maintenance costs. A past landlord had us pay for anything $300 or less.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (49 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] zanyllama52@infosec.pub 26 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Stop paying rent to see who loses their home. It's an ugly system.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Who forecloses on the tenant? The landlord

Who forecloses on the landlord? The bank

Who actually performs the eviction? The sheriff's office

Who therefore truly controls the property?

[–] Hackworth@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago (2 children)
[–] KellysNokia@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Corporate landlords who pick up the property at collapsed values and maximize rent to suppress the ability for these folks to buy property again?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] davel@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 month ago
[–] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago (4 children)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 month ago (5 children)

But if you need a place to rent... Quid pro quo.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Rocko is the landlord

load more comments
view more: next ›