this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2024
1008 points (92.9% liked)

Lefty Memes

4378 readers
48 users here now

An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the "ML" influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.

Serious posts, news, and discussion go in c/Socialism.

If you are new to socialism, you can ask questions and find resources over on c/Socialism101.

Please don't forget to help keep this community clean by reporting rule violations, updooting good contributions and downdooting those of low-quality!

Rules

Version without spoilers

0. Only post socialist memes


That refers to funny image macros and means that generally videos and screenshots are not allowed. Exceptions include explicitly humorous and short videos, as well as (social media) screenshots depicting a funny situation, joke, or joke picture relating to socialist movements, theory, societal issues, or political opponents. Examples would be the classic case of humorous Tumblr or Twitter posts/threads. (and no, agitprop text does not count as a meme)


1. Socialist Unity in the form of mutual respect and good faith interactions is enforced here


Try to keep an open mind, other schools of thought may offer points of view and analyses you haven't considered yet. Also: This is not a place for the Idealism vs. Materialism or rather Anarchism vs. Marxism debate(s), for that please visit c/AnarchismVsMarxism.


2. Anti-Imperialism means recognizing capitalist states like Russia and China as such


That means condemning (their) imperialism, even if it is of the "anti-USA" flavor.


3. No liberalism, (right-wing) revisionism or reactionaries.


That includes so called: Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, Dengism, Market Socialism, Patriotic Socialism, National Bolshevism, Anarcho-Capitalism etc. . Anti-Socialist people and content have no place here, as well as the variety of "Marxist"-"Leninists" seen on lemmygrad and more specifically GenZedong (actual ML's are welcome as long as they agree to the rules and don't just copy paste/larp about stuff from a hundred years ago).


4. No Bigotry.


The only dangerous minority is the rich.


5. Don't demonize previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.


We must constructively learn from their mistakes, while acknowledging their achievements and recognizing when they have strayed away from socialist principles.

(if you are reading the rules to apply for modding this community, mention "Mantic Minotaur" when answering question 2)


6. Don't idolize/glorify previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.


Notable achievements in all spheres of society were made by various socialist/people's/democratic republics around the world. Mistakes, however, were made as well: bureaucratic castes of parasitic elites - as well as reactionary cults of personality - were established, many things were mismanaged and prejudice and bigotry sometimes replaced internationalism and progressiveness.



  1. Absolutely no posts or comments meant to relativize(/apologize for), advocate, promote or defend:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

ID: A Sophie Labelle 4 panel comic featuring Stephie in different poses, saying:

Landlords do not provide housing.

They buy and Hold more space than they need for themselves.

Then, they create a false scarcity and profit off of it.

What they're doing is literally the opposite of providing housing.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 109 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

I honestly wouldn't be so upset about a "mom and pop" landlord that is renting their basement or garage (where I currently live...) if they weren't charging more than their fucking mortgage for it...

It's infuriating that I'm paying for their house but I have to live in a garage because I was late to the party and new loans/house prices are absolutely bat shit insane...

But but "the market!"

The market:

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 27 points 1 month ago (3 children)

The Market is also why my company tells us our pay is low, our raises are terrible, and next year we have to take shitty Cigna health insurance and like it. (And is Absolutely definitely not because CIGNA is suddenly one of our single largest clients who we also just closed a new additional deal with.)

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 25 points 1 month ago

if they weren’t charging more than their fucking mortgage for it…

Disgusting freeloaders.

[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 105 points 1 month ago (8 children)

No one should get a second home until everyone's had their first.

[–] quixotic120@lemmy.world 25 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The policy issue to overcome here in America is a robust pension system. Home values are obscene for a lot of reasons but one of the biggest reasons no one does anything about it is because for most non elite Americans the home they own is their most valuable asset and the growth in equity ends up becoming a significant contributor to retirement

Even with that the dream is over; the days of baby boomers buying houses and seeing explosive growth of 12-20k in 1960 to 200ish-k in 2010 or even gen x buying a house for 100k in 1995 and seeing it mature to 400k in 2020 are unsustainable. The people buying 250-400k houses now (like me) would be foolish to expect their homes to be worth millions in 30 years outside of hyperinflation.

But I bet money we will cling to it. It’s difficult having seen the past several generations retire very comfortably via the equity in their home, while we make the $2000 mortgage payment that will get us housing but not this benefit. Another way millennials get fucked out of something that every modern generation before them had. To be fair this one had to die but it just sucks all of this gets saddled on us because it’s not like there’s a strong likelihood social security is getting fixed in time

[–] glimse@lemmy.world 22 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The woman I toured a few houses with last week is in her late 60s and I was telling her how frustrating it was to have lost so many houses to people offering cash deals 30k over list. She decided to tell me a long story about how she reconnected with a lost love and moved down to Florida with him. But being far from family was tough so they decided to buy a second house out here for when they travel. They got "an amazing house" by offering cash, 30k over asking. She lamented how it felt like they were taking someone's starter home but her now-husband reassured her that whatever family they outbid just has to wait 20 years.

All I could say was, "you probably did buy a young family's starter home. Maybe it was even mine."

Congrats on owning two houses, I guess.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 month ago
[–] Wiz@midwest.social 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Rich people: "Can I have a 4th home, just as a little treat for myself?"

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] TheEntity@lemmy.world 29 points 1 month ago (2 children)

But a good landlord with fair prices will prevent evil landlords from price gouging tenants! /s

I mean this can happen, but nobody should have to rely on the good will of some random person. Thats one thing i learned as a kid, never trust people with money amounts of that order unless they are legally obligated to fullfill their promises. People can be super cool and nice right until they need money.

[–] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 month ago

You had me in the first half, ngl..

[–] count_dongulus@lemmy.world 26 points 1 month ago (16 children)

Alright but...there actually is a legitimate service that landlords provide. If someone does not want to own and maintain a property for a long period of time, or doesn't have enough money or means to satisfy a lender that they will be able to repay a very large loan on that property over a long time, a rental agreement is beneficial. Grad students, visa holders, travel nurses, etc probably don't want to purchase the property they're temporarily staying in.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 59 points 1 month ago

You don't have to rent from a landlord, you should have the ability to rent from a nonprofit, a co-op, etc. Housing is a human right and should never be about profit.

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 30 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Landlords aren't the exclusive source for short term housing, and don't need to be defended in this way. Advocate for and support collective ownership via housing cooperatives. Landlording is the practice of leeching money from the working class.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 month ago

There is a legitimate service being provided there. It just shouldn't be "lords" who provide it.

The problem is that the "lord" is earning tens of thousands of dollars per year for essentially no work. This makes it essentially similar to how a "lord" worked in a Feudalist system. This isn't even capitalism where someone owns capital and uses that capital to generate profit. This is just demanding a payment for being in a place.

Since being a landlord requires essentially no work, landlords can accumulate wealth, buy more property, get even more income, buy more property, etc. More wealth / property means more political power. The main thing that political power will be used for is to gain and retain more wealth, which is equivalent to more power.

Imagine how different would be if nobody could ever rent out more than one property, especially combined with a vacant units tax. You'd still have "landlords" but they would be much less lord-like.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 19 points 1 month ago

Land Contract (sometimes called "contract for deed") provides all of those same benefits, from the same people, to the same people, as renting. It is a bit of a misnomer in that it applies to any real property, and not just "land".

The difference from renting is that with the land contract:

    1. The monthly price is fixed for the life of the contract;
    1. After three years (in my state), the occupant begins gaining equity.

Grad students, visa holders, travel nurses, etc. might not necessarily want to purchase the property they are staying in, but they might also find themselves living in that area for longer than they expect. A land contract gives them the security of fixed housing costs and the flexibility of being able to walk away at any time and for any reason. They also allow the occupant to begin earning equity while still living in "temporary" housing, allowing them to save more for the future.

But, in our current market, renting is more lucrative to the landlord.

So how do we drive landlords to offer land contracts instead of rental agreements? We provide property tax exemptions to owner-occupants. We increase the nominal property tax rate: run it sky high. But, the owner-occupant exemption means the effective tax rate for homeowners (including land contract buyers) doesn't actually increase. Only investors - people who own housing they don't live in - will be paying that punitively-high tax rate.

With that sky-high tax on investment properties, today's landlords will be incentivized to become private lenders. They will be taking the exact same financial risk on the exact same people, but now those people will be called "buyers" instead of "tenants".

The only "renting" that will still remain is from landlords who live in one unit of a 2-4 unit property, or a roommate agreement, or short-term use like hotels and motels.

Home ownership is the single best predictor of financial prosperity in the US. Every housing contract should include some sort of provision for equity.

[–] drkt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

there actually is a legitimate service that landlords provide.

one I don't want to pay for, but also one they don't actually give me. My apartment is still missing several doors and I've been here for a year now. They don't give a fuck. You're also setting it up as if I have a choice but to be serviced. I don't. I don't earn enough money for my bank to want to give me a loan, even if I wanted to be in debt, to buy even the shittiest house on the market here, so I don't have a choice but to live under the thumb of a landlord.

[–] benignintervention@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I rent my house to military who don't want to buy because they'll leave in 2-3 years

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Corporate landlords specifically.

Single Family Houses – The 5 Biggest Buyers In America

As SFH investors and property managers we may find ourselves bidding on the same property as a major fund. You might get a call from a fund that wants to buy your portfolio. You could end up partnering with a fund as its local operator. You never know.

Phoenix was the first city that had just about all the major private equity firms investing in single family houses. Private equity helped drive prices in Phoenix up by 34% as you can read about in this Bloomberg article here. The next city that attracted just about all the major private equity firms was Atlanta GA. Other popular markets are CA, Chicago and Florida. PE firms are looking for markets that have experienced the biggest bubbles that have resulted in the biggest swings in values.

We call those non-linear markets. The goal is to hold properties as rentals and wait for a housing recovery. These funds are averaging about an 8% return on investment where most major multi-family / apartment funds return about 5 or 6%. Linear markets like Tulsa OK, Louisville KY, Indianapolis IN, Fort Worth TX, Columbus OH, and Kansas City have been some what over looked by the biggest players. However, there are plenty of funds coming into the linear markets with up to $50 million (which is considered a small fund) to spend on houses.

[–] SimplyTadpole@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Oh my god, tell me about it.

Even when you want to rent a place and can afford to do so, landlords make the situation really difficult because many of them put up places supposedly for rent, but make it as difficult as possible for someone to actually qualify to rent it, since they're only doing it to inflate their net worth and having someone living there apparently devalues it. It took me over a year to find a place that actually was willing to let me rent it because most others would cook up bullshit reasons to reject me (my personal favourite being one that got mad at me and put me in their blacklist for... asking too many questions about their property???).

Like... I have money. They are offering a good in exchange for money. I am willing to spend money in exchange for this good. It shouldn't be this hard.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Amadou_WhatIWant@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago (8 children)

There is a solution for landlords that we've known about for a long time.

And its doesn't involve the a massive, powerful state controlling where people can live.

Its a 100% tax on the value of land. It would stop the landowning class from unfairly stealing huge amounts of money from the poor in the form of rent. It could fund the government (allowing us to decrease taxes that hurt labor, like an income tax), or be redistributed as UBI.

Seriously, if you are at all interested in potential solutions to the housing crises and wealth inequality, please, please, google Land Value Tax and Georgism.

[–] parapsyker@startrek.website 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I live in a city where property values have increased by an order of magnitude over about 40 years.

Yes, we have a lot of speculators and wealthy landowners who need to be taxed out of existence.

But we also have a problem where seniors on fixed incomes who have owned their homes for 30 - 50 years cannot afford their property taxes because the land their homes are sitting on has exploded in value.

[–] homura1650@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

There is a solution to this: homestead exemption. A lot of states already implement implement this with their normal property tax. If a property is your primary residence, then the tax you pay on it cannot increase by more than x% a year. Some states also give preferential tax treatment to senior's primary residence. Their is no reason we couldn't implement these same breaks on a LVT.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 month ago (11 children)

Ok but where's the punchline? Why is this even a comic?

[–] Wiz@midwest.social 12 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Not all sequential art is meant to be funny.

Side note: One of the best non-fiction books of all time is Understanding Comics by Scott McCloud.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 month ago (15 children)

so are you advocating for zero private ownership of houses?

like what's the policy proposal?

I do kind of like that other comment, " nobody gets a second house until everybody gets their first".

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee 9 points 1 month ago

Landlords provide serfdom, and they are needed because of the serfdom the worst offenders impose on society.

If you live in a house long enough you should begin to have a claim on it. Most landlords add zero value to it, they only harvest it.

load more comments
view more: next ›