this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2023
854 points (98.7% liked)

News

35821 readers
2276 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nature_man@lemmy.world 126 points 2 years ago (6 children)

Probably a controversial opinion but companies should not be able to own residential real estate at all, the reason most people cant get a house is because big companies are buying them up with limitless sums of money so they can rent them out infinitely, its not a free market when the big company will pay 20% over your entire life savings just to make sure you don't own anything.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 23 points 2 years ago

Not just limitless sums, companies are borrowing at very low interest rates and skyrocketing real estate prices with free money. Consequelty also causing mass inflation. So you're paying for them owning houses.

[–] AceFuzzLord@lemm.ee 17 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Absolutely nothing controversial about the truth. In fact, I'd say it's the exact opposite of controversial, at least in this case.

[–] ComradePorkRoll@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Controversial would be, "if the government won't stop corporations from buying up single family homes, we should do it ourselves by any means necessary." That's controversial.

[–] guacupado@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

Controversial but true.

[–] notannpc@lemmy.world 15 points 2 years ago

Not controversial at all. The world would be a better place if residential real estate “investment” didn’t exist.

[–] noyou@lemm.ee 12 points 2 years ago

Yeah no this isn't controversial. Private landlords serve no purpose in society. You just pay them their mortgage for the privilege of living in their house. It's ridiculous.

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

%100 no brainer

[–] tmyakal@lemm.ee 4 points 2 years ago (4 children)

I agree in the case of single-family homes. Even in cases of 3 or 4 unit buildings. But how do you propose full-on complexes get run if not by a company? Very few individuals have the capital to buy a 50-unit building, and honestly, the US needs more dense urban housing to help reduce our impact on climate.

[–] LostWon@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 years ago

Easy. Non-profit co-ops, ideally as part of land trusts. They keep prices reasonable, give all community members a say, and the people who are lucky enough to live in them love them.

[–] thenightisdark@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

My opinion that would be just like asking who would own the streets you use to get to it.

We don't wonder how that really expensive bridge gets owned... Sometimes it's due to tolls but not always.

[–] 31337@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 years ago

Cooperative-like legal structures and public housing are viable options.

[–] noxy@yiffit.net 4 points 2 years ago

Condos. (for non-Americans, this means "apartments except owner-occupied, or at least individually owned and then rented out"

I lived in a 200+ unit condo building. Owned my unit and some proportion of the common stuff and had voting rights and such in the HOA.