Your "basic chemistry" doesn't match up with the lived experience of the plethora of people that frequently use cast iron/carbon steel. And yes, it doesn't matter what type of pan, including non-stick, if you want your food to taste good you're probably gonna start by heating up some fat. You're only building excess carbon in a cast iron/carbon steel if you leave on bits of burnt food and season over that. If you clean your pan properly (with soap and hot water, because that's totally allowed), that won't happen. Tons of people cook with cast iron/carbon steel every single day and have absolutely no problems with it. And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying everyone should only cook with cast iron/carbon steel, all I'm saying is using those pans is way less finicky than you're making it out to be.
Ugh. You wanna know the secret to cooking on cast iron/carbon steel? Just cook with it. Put fat in, get it hot, put your food in. It's really that easy. Wipe it out when you're done, rub some oil on it. That's it. You can even cook tomato sauce in it, it'll be ok. People have been using cast iron to cook all kinds of things, acidic and not, for literal centuries. This myth that cast iron/carbon steel pans are these delicate special snowflakes that need constant attention and maintenance needs to die.
The question is what they should do in order to be fair and non-parasitic.
Sell their properties to their tenants, or grant tenants equity in the property based on how much they pay in rent (ie, co-ownership).
So far, I understand that you're convinced ownership is necessary if any payment is involved. What I don't understand is why*.
For an exchange to not be parasitic, both parties must gain something equal to what they lose. This, by definition, means that a renter must be able to pay zero dollars for rent in months where the landlord doesn't have to make a mortgage payment and doesn't need to do any maintenance on the property.
We agreed that people should be paid for their labour. What makes home rentals special in that regard?
As I've already said, landlords don't provide a service equivalent to the payment provided, and the indefinite nature of a lease makes it impossible for a landlord to ever provide value equal to what a renter pays. As long as a tenant lives in a rented space, they have to pay a fee for the privilege, even if they've paid enough to pay for the mortgage many times over. You can't convince me that a landlord can provide potentially multiple properties worth of value over the span of a lease.
Dawg they are having an existential crisis. A bunch of us are, because just about every thread on the big communities on here remind us of how shit things are every day. I wouldn't rather be numb to it, and I'm not suggesting other people to be numb to it. I'm saying it's funny that someone wrote a comment about how much this site reminds them of all the shit going on, then someone replies directly to them with a list of more shit.
Please don't get yourself into the mindset that because everything is shit, we all have to feel like shit all the time too.
Landlords don't do that. Until they do, they're parasites.
Also, I can't tell if you've realized by now, but everything I've been describing as ways to make landlording "fair" is just a roundabout description of ownership.
Vegetable breeders for the veggies that you get in a normal grocery store don't typically select for tastiness/flavor, they select for things that can maximize profits - hardiness, shipability, production, etc.
You're taking the proposed solution to an extreme end of the spectrum in an effort to argue against it.
We don't need all ~7 billion of us to become self sufficient farmers. We don't even need 1 billion of us to become farmers.
What we need in the immediate short term is to encourage the adoption of better agricultural practices, such that the mega farms that currently support us can continue to support us, while minimizing their environmental* impact.
What we need in the medium term is to encourage people to create local food gardens in their communities, via education campaigns and subsidies. By no means does that mean every living being on the planet needs to take up a trowel and a hoe, but people should be encouraged to participate in the production of their own food.
What we need in the long term is to find solutions that turn those local food gardens into permanent, sustainable, long term solutions that can support entire communities. Vertical farming, indoor hydroponics, stuff like that. Which means publicly funded research and more subsidies.
There's steps to it. It's a process. It will take time, it won't happen overnight. No one is suggesting that "a city of a million people abandon all the work they do and collectively invade rural areas to set up farms they have no idea how to run". That's a strawman you've made up in your head.
How nice of you to conveniently list out all the current events worth having an existential crisis over, in a reply to a person having an existential crisis
I watched a 50 year old middle-management-looking gentleman on a train in Japan pull cards in the Pokemon TCG mobile game for like a full 15 minutes when I was in Japan a few months ago. That game has a death grip there
Then landlords should send me an itemized invoice that details each of the expenses incurred while I've been a tenant, a breakdown detailing how any rent payments cover the cost of those expenses, and a payment plan that we can negotiate to ensure both parties are getting fair deals.
Or they should give me equity in the property based on how much I pay in rent.
But they shouldn't simply charge an amount based on nothing other than "the market". That number never equates to the amount of work they put in, and makes them parasitic.
Yes, except without Microsoft spying on you