Hugucinogens

The problem is being a landlord as a job. The problem is rich people buying up housing (or land and building on it) they don’t use, in order to rent for profit.

It’s about everyone who has no house. All the people who have no alternative, apart from renting from some rich people.

If someone “allowed” others to live in his house, without demanding half their salary, you wouldn’t see me complaining.

And the reason that buying or building a house is so expensive, is explicitly because rich people clamber over each other, to make the best investment of their lives: Housing.

One heavily oversimplified answer, from the many possible ideas, is:

Nationally built cheap housing, with minimal or no rent. That means, housing as a public good, like nationally owned water and electricity companies.

Hm, I see your point about clarity.

My original comment “landlords shouldn’t be allowed to own houses” was a joke, in the sense that it is an impossible paradox, with the implied statement being “landlords shouldn’t exist”.

That is indeed the prevailing view on this platform, because it’s a leftist/marxist/anarchist platform, mostly.

I might not be the right person to give you a pointer directly into the theory of those, but I have a number of YouTubers I really like, that talk about these issues, and make incredibly good explanations.

Two I’m really into, lately, are NonCompete, and Unlearning Economics, that have some great video essays, the first one about communist perspectives, the second going in depth against things that are considered “common sense” in capitalist economics, and their real results when actually looked at.

I’d say you can click on their channels and click whatever interests you most (NonCompete has a video on thought terminating clichés lol), but I can also recommend a couple specific videos:

On NonCompete, there’s a video that contains a pretty good explanation of what is called the class war, that is, what tools the rich use, to keep the poor working. Housing costing so much, is one of those tools.

On Unlearning Economics, there is a personal favorite of mine, Free stuff is good actually. It’s more about the adjacent philosophies, but you can easily extrapolate from it, to housing, if you like spending an hour listening to a guy talking about economics lol.

Internet comments are so bad at conveying rich ideas, and so easy to not notice the humanity behind people, that it’s refreshing to have people like you answer, with the honest intent behind what they wrote. I hope what I sent interests you!

I’d hope it was a thought commencing slogan, maybe giving people curiosity as to think:

“How could another sapient person believe something so different from my own beliefs? That person is even making it a joke, therefore they must have had it bouncing around in their brain a bunch, so they must believe it and think about it a lot. Huh, maybe there is something more to know, and think about.”

I even made a comment with a small answer, to the other person, who asked like a human.

Clearly didn’t work on you though.

Imagine houses that don’t cost nine and a half fortunes, because they are not considered one of the most profitable ways to invest, for the richest people in the world.

Housing doesn’t have to be prohibitively expensive, whether temporary or permanent residences.

It’s not about rent not existing, it’s about forbidding the ways that rich people go about making housing scarce, and corner markets.

That was a kind of aggressive way for me to express that, but, in all seriousness, the reason is that:

Being a “landlord”, that is, very specifically, an “owner of houses you don’t live in, but rent to people for profit”, is a way to live that is inherently abusive to the people you rent to.

You have ownership of a basic good people need to survive (housing), which is effectively scarce (because it’s not allowed for just anyone to build a house without incredible amounts of money, even homelessness is fairly illegal in many places), and you say to people:

“Either give me a monthly fee for me to allow you to have a roof over your head, or I’m calling the police (the only people allowed to be violent in the country) to kick you out”

It’s a way of making money, where the owner doesn’t do anything helpful to society, except find people who are desperate to survive, and milk them of what they make.

Landlords shouldn’t be able to own homes.

Yeah, the only way to pass such a change to the law, would be to force it against their will… Or buy out the governments that oppose it…

Hmmm…

Hmmm…

Where would that lead? What would such a set of actions be called???

Hmmmmm…

I see so your suggestion is to make a government that has never functionally exist before

What. What are you talking about. I just said “Don’t remove Veto power”. That’s a whole different sentence you got there.

protect it based on your idealized version of how it could be used in your fantasy government.

Literally current day Europe.

eliminate something based on how it has actually been used the vast majority of the time

Criminals sell drugs. Doesn’t matter how strong a police you got, and how criminalized drugs are, drugs will be sold because Criminals want money and power. They’re just gonna get more expensive, and more harmful to the buyers. Look into the prohibition of alcohol half a century ago.

The rich and powerful, want power. They want to buy governments, in order to change the rules in their favor.

The stronger you make some governments, in comparison to others, the stronger you make the rich that can buy them, since those rich can just sway and control the weaker governments via influencing the stronger one.

Removing veto power to fight Orban and his rich backers, allows the rich of the European core to do whatever the fuck they want to the poorer European countries.

I can also seperately argue that it doesn’t even work to fight Orban and his backers, but I don’t even need to. Even if it did work, paving over the poor and vulnerable for gain, instead of finding another solution, is fascistic. There’s always countless other ways.

There’s nothing imaginary about this, colonial history is littered with dozens upon dozens of examples.

These political restructurings, are documented steps toward fascism, and they’re being taken right now.

Viktor Orban is a rich powerful authoritarian, in the pocket of bigger more powerful authoritarians.

Neither he, nor the people funding him are vulnerable minorities.

If a rich guy hires a Mafia that sends poor people to do their dirty work, you don’t make laws against being poor.

Make laws that actually solve problems, keep the weak safe from rich assholes’ manipulation, to make the Mafia weaker.

All the various “right-wing” authoritarians around Europe, are getting to power, by fucking Ginormous amounts of corruption. Greece, where I’m from, is one such joke.

Europe should protect the sanctity of those power structures, to prevent people like Orban from getting to power, instead of taking the lazy, short term way out, that leaves the Union weaker and easier to internally take over by the fascist bastards, later.

That’s the beauty of federation, that Lemmy is built on, that so many of the grassroots early adopters (all of us) appreciate so much: the natural diversity that makes humans tick.

Federation allows an environment to have all the different things, and be healthier for it, instead of treating the world as a limited, scarce place, where for something to exist, it has to take the place of what already is.

Those ideals are what almost all of us seek.

My disagreements with you, stemmed from that, your willingness to judge what is here, as lesser, and replaceable.

To the degree that you don’t do that, I legitimately love the earnest way you think of something that is good, and decide to make it.

Good luck, and I hope you do find the time 🫡

Yep, entire instance. Don’t worry about that though, the difference between Lemmy and the real world, is that anyone, can make an account anywhere, so the people that actually want to see your instance, are not going to stay in an instance that defederates you.

Each single instance, has its own defederation list, basically a block list. Defederation, is only for the single instance that decides to block yours, meanwhile literally everyone else except that instance interacts with you normally.

On top of that, Defederation is only one way, which means you can still see their content! Your interactions are just hidden from their users. Those users, are users that (under normal circumstances) know about the defederation, and choose to remain in that instance. On top of that, they also choose not to make a second account in yours, for example.

(Personally, when I wanted to see an instance that mine had defederated from, I just made a second account in that instance. Lemmy clients make having multiple accounts, and switching between them, really, really easy).

People have the freedom, and the ability, to choose who they want to interact with, here. Enjoy it, find your people.

I honestly really wish you luck, and hope you create a part of Lemmy, that is missing right now.

I like meme-dumps, I use discord for that explicit purpose (meme-dump servers). I just don’t want the good community driven culture of Lemmy, to be sacrificed for that.

Help Lemmy have both.

(For the record, I really respect the honesty that you’re facing this whole issue with. I really do wish you the best, and hope you succeed, if you try.)

Fascism ---------- Democracy ---------- Anarchy

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .⬆️

. . . . . . . . . . . . .Vetoes are here. . .

Vetoes are anti-Democratic, in the sense that they protect vulnerable minorities, from powerful majorities.

Centralization, unification, and empowerment, makes power structures much, much more vulnerable to corruption.

The ability of parts of the world to impose their will on the weaker, instead of letting them advocate for themselves, is what unavoidably walks the walk to fascism, literally every single time in history.

If you let the rich claim space (ways of communicating) without fighting for it, your communication will end up controlled.

Those who have the energy to throw hands (culturally), should.

There’s nothing wrong with those who don’t have that energy to fight, but no need to worry about others’ approach, everyone does what they know they can.

If someone rejects what you’re saying in bad faith just because of the aesthetics of how you’re saying it, they’re not worth changing your habits and ways of expression, for.

Sounds like the powerful nations in the Union, want more hierarchical power, and hierarchical structures,

“Because we need to be Strong!”

“The World has Changed, and We must not be Left Behind, we must not Become Weak!”

Now where have I heard that before…

Well, despite how slimy and disgusting everything you just said is, your position, and best future actions for you to achieve your goals, are pretty clear cut.

Start your own instance, and try to make it grow. You apparently have the experience, so go ahead.

Don’t you dare complain about people’s ability to defederate with you again, because it will start to sound like what you want, is to force people to consume what you decide to upload, and that’s authoritarian.

Do your best, since you know so well, and attract the people who agree with you.

Yeah. I wonder if there could be a secondary, parallel rating system, just for people subscribed to a community, for that reason. Jokes and memes always Top their communities, because of the various main feeds.

Maybe it isn’t exactly a problem that needs fixing, but I’m thinking about it, whether there might be an elegant solution.

Like a “Kudos” system, without negative ratings, that someone can send only if they’re subscribed to the community.

Hey hey hey hey hey there. This person’s post is LLM, and self-admitted LLM at that, but don’t you insult my headers and bullet points.

I’ve been both dedicated, and angry enough to properly format them, and I’ll do it again!

Yeah. Well, sounds about right. Rich fucks are letting the mask slip off.

Well fuck me. I’ll take that L.

I was proven a negative Nancy.