Yeah, the people whose jobs consist of building housing will benefit from legalising the construction of more housing. As a person who needs someone to build housing I'm fine with this.
-
-
yet again, hearing convenient apologies for the real estate industry.
-
The “real estate industry” is not a monolithic entity. Apartment owners and builders of new housing and real estate agents don’t have the same interests. Anyway when you figure out how to convince American voters to willingly destroy the largest pt of their wealth, let us know!
- 8 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I think there are things which capitalist countries can do to be more like Germany or Japan, where it is not a big deal whether you rent or own your home. One of those things would be laws like SB827.
-
SB827 is going the opposite way, and will make an expanded class of disempowered renters at the mercy or larger and more callous landlords.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
America is literally built on a bunch of things. Slavery used to be a key part of those property rights. I'm okay with changing things. If you want to argue that as a matter of principle, people's homes should be subject to investment desires of hedge funds, that's a position.
-
But you are defending a bill that expands investment opportunities and reduces power of renters. That seems designed to do at least the former. So one mitigation would be to reject SB827.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.