this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2023
152 points (81.7% liked)

Canada

7133 readers
267 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Regions


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social & Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Taleya@aussie.zone 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Mmm, headline mentions 'impact on renters' though - so we're already talking about people who not only own a house, they own a house that is not their residence and earns money for them

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 3 points 10 months ago

It kinda sorta does, but even the article body flip flops between “homeowner” and “owner of $3.2mil property” and likewise between “landlord” and “airbnb magnate”. The headline implies that landowners don’t understand the plight of the renter, and asserts that the landowner isn’t middle class anymore.

While there are good points in there, the headline misses the point that the “wealthy” don’t need to work, and can be independently wealthy purely through extracting rent from use of what they own.

Most property-rich householders aren’t there; their equity isn’t enough to sustain them.

There’s no denying the gap between renters and landholders. Renters are way worse off. But those renting out a carriage house or basement suite to be able to make the mortgage payments aren’t in the same class as the likes of Dorset Realty and those who own them.