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.

    • Asafum@feddit.nlEnglish
      124·
      1 month ago

      BUT PARASITE PASSIVE INCOME! HOW DARE YOU PASS UP PARASITE PASSIVE INCOME!!

      :P

    • Eheran@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      30 days ago

      And how do people pay for that? How would it be different from today? What stops people from buying one now that would not stop them in that case?

      • dwindling7373@feddit.itEnglish
        2·
        30 days ago

        I merely explained you the view of those you are talking with, I’m not well versed on the topic.

        Luckily, the answer to your question is once again easy to derive from what the other people are saying: the price would drop to a reasonable price if houses got stripped of their role as a form of investment.

        Or rather, as it’s often the case in this day and age, if the selfish return of a profit was weighted against the damage to the community and found not to be desirable.

        • Eheran@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          30 days ago

          The solution is to just define that the price is low, okay. So are there still incentives to upgrade, maintain etc. a property when the value is low anyway? Is the money you spend on something thrown out of the window as soon as it is installed on the house? What about great locations, how to value those? So all the things that already apply to the housing market, how do you want to circumvent all of these factors that go into the value of a property/house?

          • dwindling7373@feddit.itEnglish
            1·
            29 days ago

            You keep thinking I’m the herald of this position…

            I guess there’s two solution, the pragmatical approach is that people aware of the issue increase the offer on the market. The market is still a market so all you are saying still applies but it sees a rise in offer.

            The other, more idealistic but also, ideal, is government intervention so basically you get to set up the rules any way it make sense on the principle of putting a roof above everybody.

            All this aside, do you fix or upgrade the place you live in simply so that you can sell it at a higher price? I do this stuff because… That’s where I live?