We’ve had some trouble recently with posts from aggregator links like Google Amp, MSN, and Yahoo.

We’re now requiring links go to the OG source, and not a conduit.

In an example like this, it can give the wrong attribution to the MBFC bot, and can give a more or less reliable rating than the original source, but it also makes it harder to run down duplicates.

So anything not linked to the original source, but is stuck on Google Amp, MSN, Yahoo, etc. will be removed.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Correlation is not causation. I had my first heart attack when I was renting. It wasn’t BECAUSE I was a renter. You literally cannot say someone is experiencing stress because they’re a renter, that’s a stretch.

    They could be experiencing stress by their overall socio-economic status which is also a reason they are renting, not the other way around.

    I had my 2nd heart attack as a home owner. Again, my status as a renter or owner has nothing to do with it.

    • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      19 hours ago

      “Renters experience stress and anxiety over renting to the point of illness” is not code for “and homeowners don’t feel any and are all perfectly healthy.” The only way to read it that way is if you’re trying to manufacture “fact checks” (or defend them, I guess). Same energy:

      They could be experiencing stress by their overall socio-economic status which is also a reason they are renting, not the other way around.

      Oh, do you think that if the article about stress from renting mentioned that financial problems contribute to that then it would make that fact check unfair?

      Because it does.

      Renters on average spend 41% of their income on housing costs, more than any other tenure, official figures show.

      Polly Neate, Shelter’s chief executive, said: “A whole generation of children risk growing up surrounded by this constant stress and anxiety. This cannot go on.

      • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Again, correlation is not causation.

        They aren’t stressed because they’re spending 41% of their income on housing, they’re stressed because of their low socio economic status which causes them to spend 41% of their income on housing.

        It’s a symptom, not a cause.

        Again, they’re putting the cart before the horse and MBFC correctly points out what they’re trying to say is factually false.

        • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          18 hours ago

          This is actually a great example for how the bot actively discourages critical thinking, as it seems you have started from your conclusion (MBFC is correct), worked backwards, and apparently have not even read the article or anything I’ve said in response to you.

          They aren’t stressed because they’re spending 41% of their income on housing, they’re stressed because of their low socio economic status which causes them to spend 41% of their income on housing.

          Wow, I wonder if the article mentioned any other factors, like no-fault evictions and poorly maintained apartments, in the second paragraph?

          You keep talking about there being other factors like that wasn’t entirely what the article was about. Furthermore, almost every single one of those statements was about what advocacy organizations are claiming. Reporting what they are saying is factually inaccurate? Come off it.

          • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            18 hours ago

            Again, those are stressors caused by their lower socioeconomic status, not because they are renters. They are renters BECAUSE of their status, and are stressed by their status. They are NOT stressed because they are renters.

            Trying to spin it the other way is why the story is, correctly, marked as false.

            https://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/science-questions/10-correlations-that-are-not-causations.htm

            • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              17 hours ago

              For clarity, your defense of MBFC’s rating is that anxiety over rising rent costs outpacing wages (leading to more people spending more of their income on rent), worries about no fault eviction (which only happens if you rent), and stress from poor quality housing (which again is mostly a problem for renters, because homeowners can deal with it how and when they please), is somehow completely unconnected to the fact these people are renting?

              Yeah, I guess it’s technically true that they could have rented a castle or a luxury apartment instead. But it’s completely irrelevant when talking about the effects of housing insecurity on large swathes of the populace, and trying to spin it as “The Guardian says renting is bad for your health, negative points!!” is outright dishonest.

              • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                17 hours ago

                No, I’m saying them being renters is at the same level as all the other problems. They face a lot of shit because of their poor economic status, and that causes them stress, but one of the things they face is their economic status forces them to rent.

                Renting doesn’t cause the stress, it’s caused by the same thing that causes them stress. The root cause is lower socio economic status. Everything flows from that.

                • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  16 hours ago

                  They face a lot of shit because of their poor economic status, and that causes them stress, but one of the things they face is their economic status forces them to rent.

                  Cool, you have gone so far into the weeds that this no longer even resembles the original fact check, which was:

                  The survey asked: “To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements? Housing problems or worries (e.g. affording the rent, poor conditions, losing my tenancy etc.) have made me feel physically ill/sick in the last year.”

                  10% of the private renters surveyed strongly agreed and another 13% answered “tend to agree”, meaning around a quarter agreed to some extent.

                  The Guardian headlined its piece “Private renting making millions sick in England, poll shows.”

                  This suggests a causal link specifically between renting privately (as opposed to renting from the council or some other housing situation) and feeling physically ill or sick. This isn’t evidenced in the survey.

                  Survey: did housing worries make you feel sick in the past year?

                  About 1/4th of renters: yes

                  The Guardian: article focusing entirely on the stress renters face

                  MBFC: if you only read the headline this article is very misleading!!