So… will the liberals be cool with homeless folk living in those empty and useless homes for just the next 15 years? Would the liberals be cool with banning evictions for the next 15 years?
Or do I just not understand incentives {vomit meme}?
And…, 15 years ago, how many empty and useless houses had capitalism ‘created’. Is the rate of empty and useless houses that capitalism ‘creates’ increasing or decreasing. Fifteen years from now, can we WAG how many more additional empty and useless houses capitalism will have ‘created’?
I never really try to one side things or both sides them. I just post my thoughts on things. Sure, sometimes I’m doing something I’d call trolling, but mostly just trying to understand people, figure things out, express myself, convince people of something, vainly show I’m right about something, be entertained, procrastinate, etc…a lot of things, but “both sidesing” isn’t something I set out to do just for the sake of it.
Not sure what you mean exaclty, but seems like a very minor point - not worth derail.
WAG would just be follow the trend lines. Without looking anything up, I’d just say I would expect slightly more than 15 million vacant units in 15 years.
So if capitalism is going to ‘create’ a sustainable supply of empty and useless houses… why the fuck do the fools keep bleating that without the violence, we’ll run out of homes?
I guess the Econ 101 answer is that there’s less incentive for capitalists to build houses if their tenants can live in their units and refuse to pay rent.
Well, because they’re biased to what they would call the “status quo” which would be how they were brought up thinking. I think they would argue that in the longer term rental properties wouldn’t be built enough to keep up with demand and in the mean time properties would fall into disrepair. I don’t agree with them as long as people would have some security that their efforts in building and maintaining would be wasted because they have no security. I think that’s where this discussion really gets interesting. How would people behave? Why do people not take care of build things? The conservative (and partly liberal) answer is kind of that people suck. I think that’s a bad answer.
Well, the capitalists only really need as much ‘incentive’ (400 words for yellow snow) as it takes to ‘create’ occupied and useful houses. Right now the capitalists have so much unneeded ‘incentive’ (400 words for yellow snow) that they are ‘creating’ empty and useless houses too. It seems like a little paring back of the capitalist’s ‘incentives’ (400 words for yellow snow) is in order.
Or we could just kick all those useless and violent parasites to the curb. Then we don’t have to work to pay for their ‘incentives’ (400 words of yellow snow) at all.
Renters don’t need landlords, landlords need renters.
No, they are bad faith posters. They want to claim the status-que because they believe the “burden of proof” means they get to troll their victims with impunity.
It has nothing to do with the message or the messenger. Stop falling for it.
Since it just came up and you’re pretty new to the discussion and I don’t think you’re just going to play games…
How do you respond to: there’s 15 years worth of empty housing right now. How do you feel about waiting until we are at least closer to filling that up before we worry about whether or not more is built?
Start off by collecting 7 anecdotes about homeless people or squatters doing something “bad”. Make sure at least 6 of those aren’t really anything bad or are totally made up.
70% of this thread is Sabo screaming nonsense and LIBERALS!, making no sense or point, then micro calmly steps in to say over and over and over again…”what sabo means is…”
I’m trying to do what I think has a chance at turning this into an interesting conversation. I guess that’s WellNameding things up? Hmm, maybe, lovemuffining?