- Joined
- Mar 30, 2023
- Messages
- 2,301
- Reaction score
- 4,725
we're both socialists. but I'll take what I can get lol.
we're both socialists. but I'll take what I can get lol.
Apparently I’m with you, comrade.we're both socialists. but I'll take what I can get lol.
No major cities in the Western world are affordable. US actually has some of the most affordable for a first world country. Look at any major European and Canadian city and they are mostly worse.Jack is a wealthy man that lives in a bubble. He literally has no idea what life is really like for middle class/working class people. That's why his analysis often seems so completely disconnected from the reality that the rest of us live in. He literally cannot relate.
600k homes might sound like a bargain if you're living in LA/NY/SF/Seattle making 200/300/400/500k+. But when you're an average Utahn making average Utahn salaries, 600k is insane. It's a hair less Than 12x my slightly above average salary in corporate management. Affordable homes are 3-5x your salary.
Solutions is to build more, but the free market doesn’t want that to get done.
I said we fixed the shit on the sidewalk issue.
We spend millions on the housing issue and mismanage the funds.
We are actively paying to house them, but the city is inept.
Sleeping, shitting and shooting up on sidewalks isn’t a solution.
Would you be happier if the cops left them around the corner from you versus move them on?
Not all states have an issue. I know in my area of Texas things are great but we have plenty of land to build new housing and they are doing exactly that. Then we have programs for first time home buyers making under like 65k. Well that was like 10 years ago not sure if the salary cap has changed.What housing crisis? I live in a upper end building with a pool, gym, theatre, and heated garage next to huge university. Its under 1k a month here, half the fucking building is empty.
Solutions is to build more, but the free market doesn’t want that to get done.
If you have a below-average household income, your home will probably cost below average. That's just logic. There's no need to invoke ad hominems to explain why people would accept logic.Jack is a wealthy man that lives in a bubble. He literally has no idea what life is really like for middle class/working class people. That's why his analysis often seems so completely disconnected from the reality that the rest of us live in. He literally cannot relate.
600k homes might sound like a bargain if you're living in LA/NY/SF/Seattle making 200/300/400/500k+. But when you're an average Utahn making average Utahn salaries, 600k is insane. It's a hair less Than 12x my slightly above average salary in corporate management. Affordable homes are 3-5x your salary.
Rod1 is center right on economics, but I'm not. And leftists who screech about corporate ownership are morons.
Corporations are just an organizational/legal structure. They're not even that old in terms of human history (arguably developed in the 14th century, but really getting started in the 17th, and then taking a more modern form in the 19th). So obviously I can comprehend them not existing at some point. And I'm aware that there are lots of kooky ideas out there. I read the WR, for one thing.The whole point of politics is whether you support or oppose corporations. The reason you screech above it is you just think coporations existing is an undisputable fact of life. You can't comphrehend people resisting the concept.
Corporations are just an organizational/legal structure. They're not even that old in terms of human history (arguably developed in the 14th century, but really getting started in the 17th, and then taking a more modern form in the 19th). So obviously I can comprehend them not existing at some point. And I'm aware that there are lots of kooky ideas out there. I read the WR, for one thing.
It's not really possible to eliminate homelessness by making it illegal.@Sinister
I had a long reply and then my browser froze so I’ll settle for this:
The city had a 23 year old ordinance that was overturned by an authoritarian mayor and the city voiced its say and reversed the rogue mayor.
The city was one of the most pedestrian friendly cities ever and it turned into a shithole in a matter of months. Of course the only place the mayor didn’t allow camping was city hall.
You had beautiful parks and sidewalks littered with shit, bottles of piss, unconscious people and needles.
The people said no.
The people also said yes to MILLILONS OF DOLLARS of aide which the council has mismanaged. We have locations already bought and paid for in Austin that the city refuses to move forward with bringing the homeless into and it’s not NIMBY issues. We have locations just outside the city also bought and paid for.
I live here.
It went from being safe and beautiful to walk to stepping over shit in a matter of months.
Thank god people actually have a say versus ONE authoritarian mayor.
No.The profit motive and preserving or destroying it is the main crux of every real political issue.
Don't know what you're trying to say, but the profit motive simply exists. You can't "destroy" it any more than you can destroy the hunger or sex motives.Yes.
Your whole thing is about talking neoliberal unipolairy into existence as its killing everyone.
Don't know what you're trying to say, but the profit motive simply exists. You can't "destroy" it any more than you can destroy the hunger or sex motives.
No, it just is a natural part of life. Of course it can be resisted, but it inevitably exists.This is exactly what I mean. You're trying to make the thing people are working tirelessly to eliminate a natural part of life that can't be resisted.
Yeah Jack. Corporate ownership is inconsequential, just like money in politics. It's totally normal for corporations to be paying much more than asking price and for regular people to have to compete against them.Rod1 is center right on economics, but I'm not. And leftists who screech about corporate ownership are morons.
I don't really know what to tell you. Corporations are trying to make a profit; they're not engaging in some kind of economic kamikaze to hurt you. Corporations buying homes are a symptom of the problem rather than a cause. That is, there is insufficient supply to meet demand in certain high-value markets, which causes spiraling price increases that make homes a desirable investment. If you want to fuck them, fix the supply restrictions (and, indeed, you see that listed as a Risk Factor in some of their Ks).Yeah Jack. Corporate ownership is inconsequential, just like money in politics. It's totally normal for corporations to be paying much more than asking price and for regular people to have to compete against them.