On occupant-landlords: I was in this situation once as a renter. I lived with my landlady and several other people around our age. It probably was similar to the collective thing, in some ways, in that people could have gotten in each others' business, but we largely didn't
-
Show this thread
-
My landlady took money from me, much less than a corporation would, but I never felt oppressed by her or by my corporate landlords.
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likesShow this thread -
Anyway, there are certain idealized systems I can think of that could remove landlords from the equation, but if you think they're remotely plausible in a scenario where our society doesn't 100% burn down, you're just wrong. I suppose they could be implemented at lower scale
1 reply 0 retweets 11 likesShow this thread -
Like, just spitballing: everyone who doesn't outright own property pays into a housing trust, or something with a similar name,which is calculated to be able to refund the equivalent of equity if they move. You could set something like that up, but being able to refund is crucial
1 reply 1 retweet 10 likesShow this thread -
Like above all else, my worst case scenario would be a situation where I at one point bought in (literally) to the kind of rhetoric getting passed around, and collectively began buying a home through some kind of collective mortgage with two other trans girls, and fell out w them
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likesShow this thread -
In this scenario, I own one third of a building I no longer wish to occupy, with co-owners who are actively hostile to me.
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
Overall, this hardcore anti-landlord sentiment basically only even vaguely makes coherent sense if we're advocating everyone live in the country where housing prices are depressed. You can't own in most dense places without being VERY rich.
3 replies 0 retweets 7 likesShow this thread -
And in any case, owning sucks if you're not sure you have a stable job and won't need to move or just get wanderlust. It makes you like my parents, it ties you to one place forever
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likesShow this thread -
The idea that housing is a service you pay for is not actually obscene, as long as there are methods for helping people who can't pay (which collective ownership doesn't address directly either). Building equity in a thing isn't, like, a human right.
4 replies 1 retweet 12 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @BootlegGirl
The framing is wrong. In the same way that "medical insurance" exists to deny coverage, not to provide it, the landlords-and-tenants model exists to deny housing, not to provide it. Like how mana in video games exists specifically to make mana management an issue for the player.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
Well, taking away the lens of capitalism/money, the labor of medical professionals remains a scarce resource As is the labor of construction crews who build houses And land itself is the *ultimate* scarce resource, so much so that it gets used as a metaphor for all the others
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @BootlegGirl
It's not necessarily a defense of the many injustices and exploitations of the current system to say that there will be someone in any system whose job is to deny people things, as long as the supply of things is limited (Cf. "death panel" rhetoric from the right re: healthcare)
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.