BILLIONAIRE HEDGE-FUND MANAGER WARNS A “REVOLUTION” IS COMIN

Page 3 of 5 [ 77 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,180
Location: Right over your left shoulder

26 Jan 2022, 5:56 pm

Nades wrote:
Well you didn't specify how and the cost of houses have to be paid somehow. In the UK they often are housed virtually free for the tenant at least. Housing benefit is paid to them which goes to the landlord. The alternative is buying or making houses at 100k minimum each.

Renting is just borrow in a nutshell and why should borrowing be free?


The state probably should expropriate those landlords because all they're doing is skimming a profit off of public tax dollars.

They earn a livelihood simply on the basis on owning homes, they provide nothing and yet are able to reward themselves handsomely for contributing nothing.


_________________
"If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made... and they won't even admit the knife is there." Malcolm X
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,180
Location: Right over your left shoulder

26 Jan 2022, 5:57 pm

Nades wrote:
It seems strange that the west has an anti-corp stance yet everyone keeps giving them money.


You complain about feudalism and yet you continue to be a landless peasant. Checkmate leveller.


_________________
"If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made... and they won't even admit the knife is there." Malcolm X
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,489
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

26 Jan 2022, 6:13 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
Nades wrote:
Well you didn't specify how and the cost of houses have to be paid somehow. In the UK they often are housed virtually free for the tenant at least. Housing benefit is paid to them which goes to the landlord. The alternative is buying or making houses at 100k minimum each.

Renting is just borrow in a nutshell and why should borrowing be free?


The state probably should expropriate those landlords because all they're doing is skimming a profit off of public tax dollars.

They earn a livelihood simply on the basis on owning homes, they provide nothing and yet are able to reward themselves handsomely for contributing nothing.


Hmm.

Why should homes that someone purchased with their own money be expropriated by government simply because they're being used to house people who rely on government benefits for survival as they're incapable of earning their own money for whatever reason?

Landlords don't earn a livelihood simply on the basis of owning homes. That would be property investors who purchase properties simply speculating on their value appreciating while no one lives in them at all. Landlords provide housing to people, not nothing, that's what people pay them for. They may or may not be rewarded handsomely for it - some make money, others lose money. It's not so cut and dry that renting out a home to someone = lotto win.


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.


Nades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jan 2017
Age: 1933
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,770
Location: wales

26 Jan 2022, 6:14 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
Nades wrote:
Well you didn't specify how and the cost of houses have to be paid somehow. In the UK they often are housed virtually free for the tenant at least. Housing benefit is paid to them which goes to the landlord. The alternative is buying or making houses at 100k minimum each.

Renting is just borrow in a nutshell and why should borrowing be free?


The state probably should expropriate those landlords because all they're doing is skimming a profit off of public tax dollars.

They earn a livelihood simply on the basis on owning homes, they provide nothing and yet are able to reward themselves handsomely for contributing nothing.


Why can't I steal your house? How is your right over a property along with anyone elses any more valid than that of a landlord if payment never changes hands?



Nades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jan 2017
Age: 1933
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,770
Location: wales

26 Jan 2022, 6:18 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
Nades wrote:
It seems strange that the west has an anti-corp stance yet everyone keeps giving them money.


You complain about feudalism and yet you continue to be a landless peasant. Checkmate leveller.



Many laws exist that allow people to have free land. It's called "adverse possession" here and is legally binding if done through the correct channels.

The problem with people like you and many others is they assume "land" = "houses" and this is where the problem lays. Houses are man made commodities that need to be purchased. Land is not and can be claimed.



funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,180
Location: Right over your left shoulder

26 Jan 2022, 6:25 pm

Nades wrote:
Why can't I steal your house? How is your right over a property along with anyone elses any more valid than that of a landlord if payment never changes hands?


Just because a certain type of parasitic behaviour is currently allowed doesn't mean it ought to be and seething because someone identified it as such doesn't address that fundamental truth.

There's no inherent right to make a livelihood off of owning housing; scalping housing isn't the same as providing housing and no attempt at distracting from that truth will succeed.


_________________
"If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made... and they won't even admit the knife is there." Malcolm X
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


NoClearMind53
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

Joined: 25 Mar 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 369

26 Jan 2022, 6:29 pm

goldfish21 wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Well . . . there go HIS fifteen minutes of fame . . .


You think he’s chicken littling?

There was an article out a few years ago about some Billionaire luxury brand owner (fashion handbags and other crap) who was quoted as saying that what kept him up at night was the fact that the wealth divide is so severe and keeps growing that he worries that the common working class is going to rebel against rich people like him. And now here we are a few years later and things are only getting worse… sooo, maybe these guys aren’t exactly wrong and they are able to forecast what might happen when the pressure builds up too high. It’s not all Thaaaat different from forecasting sales demand or stock price appreciation.. market pressures build and then things happen.


No. It seems people will shift the blame elsewhere as they always do. They blame immigrants for inequality. If there is a revolution it will be a right wing fascist one.



Nades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jan 2017
Age: 1933
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,770
Location: wales

26 Jan 2022, 6:30 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
Nades wrote:
Why can't I steal your house? How is your right over a property along with anyone elses any more valid than that of a landlord if payment never changes hands?


Just because a certain type of parasitic behaviour is currently allowed doesn't mean it ought to be and seething because someone identified it as such doesn't address that fundamental truth.

There's no inherent right to make a livelihood off of owning housing; scalping housing isn't the same as providing housing and no attempt at distracting from that truth will succeed.


A house is a man made object. Why can't I make I living off owning them? If someone wants to build one and sell it to person A then he can. If person A then wants to sell that house to person B who happens to be a landlord 20 years later then that's up to person A.

I don't really understand where you or anyone else other than the builder, person A and person B come in to the picture.



funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,180
Location: Right over your left shoulder

26 Jan 2022, 7:01 pm

Why can't I make a livelihood off of hording necessities?!

Because the benefits to society from restricting that behaviour outweigh the benefits to society for allowing that behaviour.


_________________
"If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made... and they won't even admit the knife is there." Malcolm X
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


Nades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jan 2017
Age: 1933
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,770
Location: wales

26 Jan 2022, 7:14 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
Why can't I make a livelihood off of hording necessities?!

Because the benefits to society from restricting that behaviour outweigh the benefits to society for allowing that behaviour.


A lot of man-made items are necessities but they're still man made so nobody has an innate right to owning them. Houses are not like water or air. Why do people build their own new necessities if the concern is so pressing or does something called "capital" get in the way of such an endeavour? Capital that needs to be provided by wealthier people?

I explained earlier that the land can be free. Just the tricky business of building a house without turning it into a man-made commodity.

Still haven't explained how society is allowed to awkwardly shoehorn itself in the middle of private property transactions between two citizens other than from a very vague moral perspective which I already explained is irrelevant.

If someone wants to buy 100 houses then so be it. It's private property being purchased from the owners of that private property by another person. Society has no say in the matter.



goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,489
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

26 Jan 2022, 7:18 pm

Demand for rentals sets the price for rent, not some scalper's wet dream of how much they feel like charging just because.

The part I don't like about how the real estate market functions are all the houses/townhomes/condos bought up by investors, many of them foreign, that are then removed from the housing stock entirely as they never become homes that anyone lives in. We've constructed more than 20% more homes than needed by actual human use demand, yet our sales and rental markets are so tight that prices are spiralling upwards out of control. I believe we should have some regulations in place dictating that units of housing constructed must be used to home people, not just to store wealth as if condos are just giant safety deposit boxes to stuff full of cash.

Don't you live where housing is very inexpensive compared to the rest of the country? Are your complaints about where you live? Or where I live? Or just housing in general?

There have been landlords and tenants for hundreds, maybe thousands of years now. This system isn't going to completely go away. It could use some better structure and regulations, though.


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,180
Location: Right over your left shoulder

26 Jan 2022, 7:24 pm

Nades wrote:
Still haven't explained how society is allowed to awkwardly shoehorn itself in the middle of private property transactions between two citizens other than from a very vague moral perspective which I already explained is irrelevant.


You sound like you're unaware that the state already has an interest in regulating commerce. That's literally what you're describing.


_________________
"If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made... and they won't even admit the knife is there." Malcolm X
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


Nades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jan 2017
Age: 1933
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,770
Location: wales

26 Jan 2022, 7:27 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
Nades wrote:
Still haven't explained how society is allowed to awkwardly shoehorn itself in the middle of private property transactions between two citizens other than from a very vague moral perspective which I already explained is irrelevant.


You sound like you're unaware that the state already has an interest in regulating commerce. That's literally what you're describing.


Not really. Private property has a lot of exemptions with the main one being they state can't just steal it. Taxes need to be paid on the sales but the sale can go ahead on the owners whim and there is little anyone can do about it.



funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,180
Location: Right over your left shoulder

26 Jan 2022, 7:35 pm

goldfish21 wrote:
Don't you live where housing is very inexpensive compared to the rest of the country? Are your complaints about where you live? Or where I live? Or just housing in general?

There have been landlords and tenants for hundreds, maybe thousands of years now. This system isn't going to completely go away. It could use some better structure and regulations, though.


I live near Toronto, which is almost as bad as where you live.

I'm aware that there's been landlords for generations, but that's irrelevant.
Lots of social practices are reformed by the state over time by force of law. Serfdom, chattel slavery and martial rape were all acceptable legally until they weren't. There's no inherent reason that current housing norms have to be assumed to be the only way things can possibly exist, it's a logical fallacy.

If the political will exists structures can be changed. If enough people recognize an established norm as a source of inefficiencies a political structure either will be capable of addressing that issue or will risk losing legitimacy and having things settle themselves out in a more radical way.


_________________
"If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made... and they won't even admit the knife is there." Malcolm X
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,180
Location: Right over your left shoulder

26 Jan 2022, 7:41 pm

Nades wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
Nades wrote:
Still haven't explained how society is allowed to awkwardly shoehorn itself in the middle of private property transactions between two citizens other than from a very vague moral perspective which I already explained is irrelevant.


You sound like you're unaware that the state already has an interest in regulating commerce. That's literally what you're describing.


Not really. Private property has a lot of exemptions with the main one being they state can't just steal it. Taxes need to be paid on the sales but the sale can go ahead on the owners whim and there is little anyone can do about it.


They can rezone the land underneath it, they can condemn it and there's also eminent domain laws. There wouldn't be a need for expropriation lawyers if expropriation cases didn't occur, right? Some legal framework already exists and more can be implemented if there's enough political will to do so.

Further, with housing they (at least hypothetically) can build more housing to increase supply and reduce prices.


_________________
"If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made... and they won't even admit the knife is there." Malcolm X
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


Nades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jan 2017
Age: 1933
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,770
Location: wales

26 Jan 2022, 7:43 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
Nades wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
Nades wrote:
Still haven't explained how society is allowed to awkwardly shoehorn itself in the middle of private property transactions between two citizens other than from a very vague moral perspective which I already explained is irrelevant.


You sound like you're unaware that the state already has an interest in regulating commerce. That's literally what you're describing.


Not really. Private property has a lot of exemptions with the main one being they state can't just steal it. Taxes need to be paid on the sales but the sale can go ahead on the owners whim and there is little anyone can do about it.


They can rezone the land underneath it, they can condemn it and there's also eminent domain laws. There wouldn't be a need for expropriation lawyers if expropriation cases didn't occur, right? Some legal framework already exists and more can be implemented if there's enough political will to do so.

Further, with housing they (at least hypothetically) can build more housing to increase supply and reduce prices.


Then the owner will demolish the house that stands on that land.

Expropriation is still expropriation even if state sanctioned.

It's also not that easy too. Judges and jurors can repeal any and all law and such blatant theft will be unlikely to get far in the courts.