Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)FI
Posts
0
Comments
187
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Landlord/owner whatever. They are synonyms. That you think it significant is concerning.

    provide a place for people who can't afford them

    If the value of the home and the income from rents is the same as your expenses it's a bad investment and should be sold. Doesn't have to be necessarily if it's not costing anything but it's just not a good investment.

  • Too bad. Person b will work off the debt. He's just made life harder for himself and he reaps that reward.

    That's why there are systems in place to verify ownership and this is part of the risk of buying from shady characters.

  • As I've repeatedly stated- my argument is an individual argument. Yours is a misplaced blanket that attacks me personally.

    I don't have a problem with you guys wanting a system change. I have a problem with you guys not having a viable alternative and making personal attacks then getting upset when I object to said personal attack. You saying all landlords are evil is an Individual attack to which I take exception.

  • More like

    Bank - > landlord

    Landlord -> bank

    Landlord -> property taxes, maintenance, improvements, insurance, pest control, etc

    Renter -> landlord

    You not taking these simple facts of life seriously really highlights why Noone in reality takes you serious But hey- who am I to interfere with your obviously well-educated and experienced self.

  • No you.

    Renters pay for a place to live.

    Homeowners pay for equity.

    Facts are facts sorry you don't like it.

    The moment a renter pays taxes, repairs, mortgage, and all the other miscellaneous items a homeowner pays for AND there was an agreement that it's a rent-to-own situation- THEN you have an argument t.

  • Except in every other thread I'm also being thrown under the guillotine. So - you need to have an internal discussion so all of you are on the same page. You need to actually say what you mean rather than the buzzword salad you all spout. And most importantly you need to come up with a real solution rather than this hyper stupid and never gonna happen idea that people are going to just give away what they own.

  • I have no issue with any of what you said. My entire argument is about the Individual ownership and the attacks I receive from you guys.

    Your arguments have not been the system is bad and it's the mega billionaires etc... it's all landlords are bad because they own something you feel should be given away for free.

  • I do happen to have my properties bought off and I don't really care what the rent is as long as it's making a return that makes sense.

    If your issue is with the system- great I agree the system isn't the best. If your issue is with people that happen to own a thing and rent it to people- get fucked.

  • If they can't afford the empty house... either it is rented or they sell it. Do you think people are sitting on houses they can't afford and also intentionally keep empty? What point are you trying to make here?

  • Right. So because you can't afford it- it should be given to you for free? What have you bought recently? Am I entitled to that? How about you loan it to me for a set fee over time? Which makes more sense?

  • Uh- he literally didn't. The owner did these things. He paid the agreed upon amount to live in the house that he doesn't own and doesn't improve or repair or pay taxes for.

    I pay taxes - does that mean I own some percent of the road? Schools? Emergency service? Of course not. Do I get to utilize these things that I didn't build but do pay a fee for over time? Yes.

    That you can't see this makes you quite a bit more than suspect.

  • Did you just miss that the entire argument rests on unimproved land? By definition a home is on improved land.

    Besides I really don't care what smith or anyone else says- I'm not giving you the things I've paid for for free. If you want to use it- you can make an offer. But I'm not evil for not giving you something I worked for. You are for wanting it from me for free.

  • That's fine. That's not what you have been saying though. What you've been saying is take my stuff and redistributed because I'm evil.

    Way more effective to actually say the things you mean because we didn't all buy into your Marxism and discuss it internally- so we don't know what that you mean y when you say x.

  • Him/her/whatever.

    Misgender me all you want- I know who I am and don't require you to know innate things or particular responses.

    But if you really need it: I didn't mean to misgender anyone.

  • Buddy I'm replying to the things he's saying. If it hurts your brain that I'm detailing why the things he say make no sense that's on you. If hexbear is all people like you- that's on them.

    I am new to lemmy and would prefer actual discussion- if certain groups brigade and shitpost in lieu of discussing- that's on them.

  • Great. i don't owe it to you. And I M not evil for not giving it to you. Make your case actually about the things you want- not some proxy bullshit that makes no sense and attacks me (and people like me)needlessly.

    If you want to do something different- go do it. Go buy a place. Get a loan. Petition your senators. Give your house out as an example, etc. If you aren't willing to do anything no one will do anything for you.