Details are still scant, but…
“I mean, he had a lot of ammunition in that house, and certainly … all of us were strapped, you know, with ammunition, and we were calling for additional ammunition,” Kraus said. “Like I said, we tried to give him every opportunity to come out.”
…I’ll go way out on a limb and suggest that this could’ve been handled better.
Indeed. If you want anything better than the cheapest apartments to exist, you have to be able to evict people who can’t afford more than the cheapest apartments.
But people these days can’t even afford the cheapest apartments, so what’s the point of having “better” apartments for the minority?
So instead let the people move into those apartments for free, damage them and then let them shoot at police trying to evict them?
Would you be willing to part with your life savings to give them to me just because I left a comment to your thread? If not, why are you expecting other people to part with the houses they built with their life savings for some random bloke?
By definition, people can afford the cheapest apartments, because that’s how those apartments get rented at that price point.
Do you not see the problem here?? Your definition only includes those able to rent. As soon as the price of the cheapest apartment rises anyone under that cutoff becomes invisible to you.
Yes that is what happens when you have too little supply.
Fuck the children of poor people, idiots should’ve been working to supplement the families income if they didn’t want to be crammed into a room with their siblings. Lazy ass kids…
I love how you say this like it’s a crime against humanity lol
👍
Some people should be allowed to fail.
Some people being anyone who is unable to pay rent?
Sure, I could conceive of a scenario where someone who couldn’t afford rent should be allowed to fail. Are you unable to?
So I can just take all your stuff and you’re fine with it because fuck private property?
There are huge problems in the current system but just letting the person with the most guns do whatever they want is not a good solution
If it prevents someone from being homeless without risking someone else (or me) being homeless then yes. Private property should not be of a higher concern than someone having shelter.
You could be helping hundreds of people in poor countries survive, but you’re not. You should be selling your property and donating the proceeds to UNICEF or similar.
Do you not understand the difference between taking from someone that’s hoarding a resource required by society and taking everything someone owns?
You have more than you need, though, and someone else needs it more than you do. You don’t have to give up everything you own, just everything in excess of your need.
This is bad faith trolling. Youre conflating the private property corporations and the wealthy hoard, depriving people of vital resources for their own profit, with my personal property of a few spoiled apples that I wasn’t able to eat.
Me pinching pennies so I can donate even more is not going to make a lasting impact whereas disowning those willfully depriving others will.
You said
Your private property could be used to help house someone much more in need than yourself.
Personal Property is distinct from Private.
You’re literally advocating for stealing from one person to provide for another here so the question is apt.