this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2024
283 points (86.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

36173 readers
707 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Reason I'm asking is because I have an aunt that owns like maybe 3 - 5 (not sure the exact amount) small townhouses around the city (well, when I say "city" think of like the areas around a city where theres no tall buildings, but only small 2-3 stories single family homes in the neighborhood) and have these houses up for rent, and honestly, my aunt and her husband doesn't seem like a terrible people. They still work a normal job, and have to pay taxes like everyone else have to. They still have their own debts to pay. I'm not sure exactly how, but my parents say they did a combination of saving up money and taking loans from banks to be able to buy these properties, fix them, then put them up for rent. They don't overcharge, and usually charge slightly below the market to retain tenants, and fix things (or hire people to fix things) when their tenants request them.

I mean, they are just trying to survive in this capitalistic world. They wanna save up for retirement, and fund their kids to college, and leave something for their kids, so they have less of stress in life. I don't see them as bad people. I mean, its not like they own multiple apartment buildings, or doing excessive wealth hoarding.

Do leftists mean people like my aunt too? Or are they an exception to the "landlords are bad" sentinment?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The answer, which should be obvious, is that workers produce housing. How do you insert landlords into that process in a way that isn't parasitic?

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Who pays the workers and buys the materials? Whose land does this happen on?

[–] CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

You are referring to private employers and landowners who are also parasitic and non-essential to housing production.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Clearly you don’t have a solution for bringing housing into being except an utterly dangling magical notion that “workers will create it” with no answers to where, out of what, and while eating what.

You just keep calling different economic actors “parasites” without describing exactly what it is you think they are feeding on which could stand on its own.

You can smear paid employment, land ownership, and property ownership all you want but these are pretty big features in our economy and unless you have something better to answer with, sweeping them away does nothing.

So try replying in an affirmative mode where you don’t just call something parasitic but describe how you really think it will work, and be a little more thorough than just one microscopic part of it. Because my dude, workers create housing today.

[–] CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

You won't understand the solution until you understand the problem. I've already explained to you how landlords are parasitic. For similar reasons so are employers and land owners. The wealth they accumulate as owners of private property is not from any labor that they do themselves, but rather the labor of workers. To be clear, I'm not using the term parasitic pejoratively. I'm just being objective. Yes, workers produce housing today because that is how housing is produced, but landlords and their ilk are just overhead to housing production. If you still don't understand, then please explain why you think that landlords are indispensable.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Throwing it back at me to disprove your claim is a declaration of bankruptcy.

[–] CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I didn't throw anything back at you. I'm checking in with you to see if you're still having trouble and, if so, where.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I’m not having trouble. You have yet to make any case whatsoever.

Your “explanation” is nothing but a string of pejoratives. Here’s how you describe someone offering the use of an object they own, for a price:

the license to withhold or take away housing from people.

They capture it and extort people for temporary permission to live in it.

In other words they offer the use of something for a price. Oh but they’re not offering it! They’re holding a license to take it away! LOL

A landlord owns a home, an object of great value, and they choose not to use it or sell it, but to sell the use of it. A tenant needs a home but has neither the resources to build or buy one. There is an exchange of value between these parties. That’s renting.

You do nothing to argue that this is parasitic except to slather it with pejoratives. Your list of anecdotal bad experiences people have had with landlords is utterly immaterial to the discussion of whether landlording is definitionally unethical.

I believe you exposed the core of your beliefs here:

The rental income that a landlord collects is not a wage based on any labor that they do.

First of all, how is that true? I purchased my home with money I earned from my labor. Am I not permitted to now own it? And am I not permitted to offer the use of the thing I own? Why? And while we’re at it, who says that all renters pay rent from labor wages? Some of them may pay with dividends from their investments.

To the core, though, the argument seems to be that labor is the only value that exists. Which is bad news for anyone past working age, I guess.

You need to establish some foundations like you think property ownership itself is unethical and labor is the only value before your case even begins to appear on stage.

Instead of this, you’re claiming that your string of pejoratives is an argument which I simply fail to understand. Which is, again, just a pejorative characterization. You’ve offered nothing but here.

[–] CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm sorry if you feel offended, but I'm using this terminology objectively. I do not believe that being a landlord automatically makes someone a bad person. However, landlordism is an harmful feature of our predominant mode of production. It relies on the prevalence of homelessness as a credible threat, after all.

Your list of anecdotal bad experiences people have had with landlords is utterly immaterial to the discussion of whether landlording is definitionally unethical.

I don't think I listed any anecdotes. You expressed interest in emotional reasoning as to why people resent landlords so I copied some examples of it that I had already written. The ethicality of being a landlord isn't relevant to the economic role of landlords as parasites.

The rental income that a landlord collects is not a wage based on any labor that they do.

First of all, how is that true?

The fact that landlord's do not collect rent based on any labor that they do hasn't been in question since Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations at the latest. Rental income is also known as passive or unearned income. That's the appeal of it to landlords or prospective landlords. It's an established concept. Even if you think that residential rental agreements are perfectly free and voluntary, that's irrelevant to the fact that landlords do not produce or provide anything.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Anyway it’s lunchtime and I need to go be objectively extorted out of the fruits of my labor by some parasite wielding a license to withhold food from me and the credible threat of starvation.