• GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    God, if only people could just like pool their resources together to build homes or something…

    We could even call it something like “social housing,” and have it be a publically regulated service instead of treating housing as some sort of game of investment for the wealthy? No no, totally impossible…

    • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Even going back to the way things were in the 70’s where workers got a fairer share of the products of their labour that wasn’t leeched away by non-productive shareholders would make a huge difference. There’s a reason you could buy a house on a single income when you had 5 kids back then.

      • derpgon@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hell we had deals where if you build the house yourself, they will give you the plot of land absolutely for free. But that was 30 years ago. I am absolutely sure people these days couldn’t do it - either not manually skilled enough, but have the money, or manually skilled, but their job doesn’t pay well enough to afford spending time building a house.

      • GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well, the 70s was before the time of Reagan and Thatcher coming in and wrecking unions and deregulating commerce and industry.

    • droans@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      You also pretty much described what S&Ls were.

      Honestly wish they could make a comeback, but we’d need to ban them from becoming national organizations. Their biggest benefits were that they helped people get houses, provided proper financial advice, and kept money local.