this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2026
554 points (98.9% liked)

People Twitter

10298 readers
826 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major celebrity, figure or any politician. If you replace the "x" at their site with xcancel (so it beomes xcancel.com), and you're not on mobile, it will save video. https://web.archive.org/save is another great option. Archive.is is no longer recommended because they remove/alter content.
  7. If a tweet (or similar) makes a statement of fact, either mark it as "satire" in the body or provide the original source link backing up the statement

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world -3 points 53 minutes ago* (last edited 52 minutes ago) (1 children)

What I find ironic mostly is the same folks who are bitter they will never own a home are also the same folks who fight housing development and are pro-rent control.

They basically choose policies that will fuck themselves over more in the future and make them owning a home ever more difficult than it already is.

But I mean, so did their parents.

And they are all eating avocado toast and also complaining about how expensive that is... but they are still going out and buying it.

[–] titanicx@lemmy.zip 2 points 32 minutes ago (1 children)

We have housing development all over Utah. Not easy to afford those half million dollar starter homes. Also pro rent control is exactly the policy they need to prevent the mass purchase of homes by a single entity or person. If it's not as profitable, then they won't do it.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world -1 points 25 minutes ago* (last edited 20 minutes ago) (1 children)

without those new homes, the existing starter homes would be 700K.

rent control restricts development, and gives preference to those who already live there over those who want to move, which locks people into their homes and further increases upward price pressures.

the problem is you see everything in terms of YOU YOU YOU. you can't afford the new homes, so you think they are bad and make things worse. but those new homes are getting bought by people who would otherwise buy old homes and make those even more expensive than the new ones.

the issue that nobody is talking about is that the USA as a whole, is like 30 million housing units in the red, and it's far worse in some areas than others. In cities where they have built enough to meet demand, prices have plateaued and sometimes started coming down. Because at the end of the day, it's a local issue. it's individual towns and cities that choose to permit new housing construction, they are the ultimate force in all of this and they have systematically suppressed new housing for 30+ years. The last time housing construction was on pace with housing demand was 1995. every year since then, housing construction has been less than demand, and thus housing prices have gone up 300% because there simple aren't enough houses for people to buy, so the houses that are for sale, go to the rich people who can afford them.

anyway, yeah vote for rent control and screw everyone else, as long as you have yours right, surely you'll be the one who gets the rent controlled unit and fuck everyone else who isn't lucky enough to get one. that is the american way.

[–] titanicx@lemmy.zip 1 points 14 minutes ago (1 children)
[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 1 points 5 minutes ago* (last edited 5 minutes ago) (1 children)

yeah man, just keep saying bullshit. that will make houses become affordable for you.

or maybe go to your local zoning board meeting and vote for more housing development. nah, that that can't work.

[–] titanicx@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 minutes ago

And absolutely zero that you said will make housing more affordable. From your point of view it sure the fuck sounds like you're either a developer or an investor in housing. Or possibly a landlord since you're screaming so much about rent controls ruining the possibility of more affordable housing.

[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 8 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

In 1960 the minimum wage was $1.00/hour and the price of the average US home was $11,000.00

[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (2 children)

That's 11000 hours still...so, 40 years?

EDIT: Misscalculated a bit. 1+ year apparently.

[–] SystemDisc@feddit.org 6 points 1 hour ago

I see you, @WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today. Keep trying. You can do it

[–] baronvonj@piefed.social 5 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

There are ~2080 working hours in a year (52*40). So 5.5ish years

[–] abysmalpoptart@lemmy.world 2 points 52 minutes ago (1 children)
[–] baronvonj@piefed.social 4 points 45 minutes ago (1 children)

I'm only just now getting over looking for shittymorph and you expect me to start checking usernames again‽

[–] abysmalpoptart@lemmy.world 3 points 41 minutes ago* (last edited 40 minutes ago)

Hahaha oh man I miss novelty accounts like that one. One time i saw shittymorph give an actual reply and I was like omg and shared it with people, but apparently he goes back and deletes all their posts that don't do the quote

[–] Beth@piefed.social 12 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

In the long run, yeah, it does save a lot of money to prepare your own meals and coffee, even now. But the people who yap like toast and coffee are the sole reason things are unaffordable truly suck and are completely detached from reality.

[–] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 5 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Right, it's also the cost of tattoos.

[–] titanicx@lemmy.zip 1 points 31 minutes ago

And nose rings!

[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 2 points 7 hours ago

The productivity loss of not using those, would cost you more in the long-run.

[–] ddplf@szmer.info 15 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

To be fair though, I'm living in a village and mostly cook for my family myself. I've been to Warsaw the other day and visited a small roardside store and a cafeteria.

For the price of a sandwich I could make an entire meal. For the price of what I bought in a cafeteria (a croissant, a jar of jam, small pack of cookies) I could feed my 2+1 family for a few days.

A small cup of coffee costs as much as a homemade dinner in itself either.

I'm not saying you shouldn't eat out. I'm saying these parasites are milking us dry.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 46 minutes ago)

the economics of all that are different depending on where you live.

some cities eating out not very expensive compared to the time and cost of preparing food at home.

other cities, it's wildly cheaper to eat at home than eat out.

also depends on the food in question, the quality, and the market. Where I live $5 is a cup of coffee at the nice cafe, but there is no way that's buying you a proper meal for dinner at home either, that is closer to $10, but that same meal at a restaurant will run you $50+ And meal box services are VERY popular due to the fact their volume purchasing lowers the per meal cost to around the same as making your own food.

further, some people just don't have the energy or time to grocery shop and cook every day, or don't think the opportunity cost is worth it. lots of folks who can't afford to eat out, economically speaking, still do because well they don't prioritize saving or budgeting.

In 1960 the minimum wage was $1.00/hour and the price of the average US home was $11,000.00

[–] LORDSMEGMA@sh.itjust.works 24 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

How tf you don't have a house if you didn't get avocado toast?

[–] Flower@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Usually because the house deposit required goes up a lot faster then the amount you saved.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 1 points 51 minutes ago* (last edited 50 minutes ago)

housing market used to go down. back in ye olden days housing prices largely went up and down as part of the business cycle.

but it's not allowed to do that anymore. now we inflate everything and pretend the economy is growing because stocks are going up.

[–] cabillaud@sh.itjust.works 12 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

I bet the lazy fucker likes to go on vacation with his kids from time to time. Imagine complaining not to be able to afford a house while basking at the beach every summer.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

my brother just took his family on week beach vacation, it cost them about $8,000. How much avocado toast is that?

if you dont' take beach vacations for 5 years, that's about 40K, which is enough for a down payment on a house.

[–] Waterpumpee@lemmus.org 3 points 14 hours ago

Homeoffice indeed saves so much money. I think even carbon emmissions are roughly reduced by 30% for workers with WFH. Imagine not relying on a car anymore. Over lifetime, buy/maintenance/fuel prices for a car roughly amount to the price of a house actually. Now you'd not want to buy a house at the end of your lifetime but it reaaaaally sums up.

[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 0 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

A house to watch the climate change from!

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 2 points 48 minutes ago

depending on where the house is climate change would increase it's value.