Yeah, the landlord here is nothing more but another wage slave looking for a way to be less dependent on his wage/salary when the mortgage of his rental property is finally paid off. A symptom of a larger issue, maybe an asshole, but probably just trying to provide for his own family like we all are. Doesn’t sound like a millionaire.
I mean yeah exactly, the corporate ones are the bigger problem. This is just one guy. The corporate landlords are pricing even the private landlords out of the market, let alone first-time homebuyers.
Blackstone’s real estate divison in particular should be disbanded and its’ assets sold at auction to private individuals ONLY. Everyone (not here, but in general) talks about Blackrock, a company that mostly focuses on providing ETFs and other financial instruments, while Blackstone is literally out there buying up America’s single family homes and people barely talk about them.
Privatizing housing is the system that created the problem. Under the current system, housing is a commodity that can be bought and sold. Like any commodity, cornering the market leads to monopoly by which the only supplier is a cartel of a few private entities. Cartel because they work together to fix prices to their benefit.
What is the primary difference between just one guy and Blackstone?
Why does just one guy seem legitimate?
Why should we define property in a way that allows landlords to exist?
Same way we already collect resources for roads, infrastructure, and government buildings:
we build housing anyways.
You think the White House was built for free?
By the way if you are in the US the allocation if resources for infrastructure like roads is already misallocated as fuck, if you live in an urban city center you are subsidizing the road infrastructure for the suburbanites, so that you can enjoy their smog being blown in your face as they commute to the city center from their cosy single family houses.
Look up strongtowns, they did plenty of studies showing this effect across various huge US cities.
The nice thing about capitalism is that it kind of solves allocation of resources without having a central control that’s prone to abuse and mismanagement.
You can’t afford to live where you want because it’s a popular place, you have to go elsewhere, and companies will build houses there because there is demand.
Now there are a few issues ofc like private companies being allowed to own housing, which needs to be banned. The other one being the over regulation and single family house zoning that has racist origins in the Us and absolutely fucked shit up, another reason why government regulation is bad and can be abused.
I live in a “commie block” in Europe that was planned so that everything is in walking distance, so not all government control is bad, but I believe this can be achieved without having to have tight control over what is built where, with more control over public transit.
i say let the market solve the housing problem, and let cities/towns provide affordable housing locally for the community.
In my city we have a homeless shelter for people who need housing in rough times, we have social housing that’s more long term and stable and costs like 30 euros a month for an apartment and we also recently opened rent-controlled flats that are owned by the city and are rented out at cost.
And this is in a central european country with nowhere near the resources and richness of the US…
I am not so sure what I read. Is this an argument for corporate/fascist controlled housing abuses, or that of the collective?
I say this because both 🇺🇲 & 🇯🇵 no longer have a “market,” but a monopsony.
I plan to emigrate to Europe in hopes to bring more black anarchist thought and free housing until none are unhoused.
You can indeed. The State of California may not like it, and even deathcamp you, but that’s what “no borders” means in anarchism. Californians have yet to form anarchist solidarity.
Who will decide
The unhoused.
OT, Are you lost or something? Do you not read theory?
The banks make money whilst its slaves point fingers amongst themselves.
Yeah, the landlord here is nothing more but another wage slave looking for a way to be less dependent on his wage/salary when the mortgage of his rental property is finally paid off. A symptom of a larger issue, maybe an asshole, but probably just trying to provide for his own family like we all are. Doesn’t sound like a millionaire.
∗ahem∗
I mean yeah exactly, the corporate ones are the bigger problem. This is just one guy. The corporate landlords are pricing even the private landlords out of the market, let alone first-time homebuyers.
Blackstone’s real estate divison in particular should be disbanded and its’ assets sold at auction to private individuals ONLY. Everyone (not here, but in general) talks about Blackrock, a company that mostly focuses on providing ETFs and other financial instruments, while Blackstone is literally out there buying up America’s single family homes and people barely talk about them.
Privatizing housing is the system that created the problem. Under the current system, housing is a commodity that can be bought and sold. Like any commodity, cornering the market leads to monopoly by which the only supplier is a cartel of a few private entities. Cartel because they work together to fix prices to their benefit.
Then you’re still not comprehending the problem:
Housing should be FREE.
You are FREE to live in a homeless shelter.
Who will build houses for FREE? Who will pay for the materials?
It’s a nice idea in concept, but a fucking moronic when it meets real life.
I am all for social housing and rent-controlled housing owned by towns and cities.
But all housing being FREE is stupid…
I didn’t stutter.
Same way we already collect resources for roads, infrastructure, and government buildings:
we build housing anyways.
You think the White House was built for free?
Maintenance, same way.
By the way if you are in the US the allocation if resources for infrastructure like roads is already misallocated as fuck, if you live in an urban city center you are subsidizing the road infrastructure for the suburbanites, so that you can enjoy their smog being blown in your face as they commute to the city center from their cosy single family houses.
Look up strongtowns, they did plenty of studies showing this effect across various huge US cities.
The nice thing about capitalism is that it kind of solves allocation of resources without having a central control that’s prone to abuse and mismanagement.
You can’t afford to live where you want because it’s a popular place, you have to go elsewhere, and companies will build houses there because there is demand.
Now there are a few issues ofc like private companies being allowed to own housing, which needs to be banned. The other one being the over regulation and single family house zoning that has racist origins in the Us and absolutely fucked shit up, another reason why government regulation is bad and can be abused.
I live in a “commie block” in Europe that was planned so that everything is in walking distance, so not all government control is bad, but I believe this can be achieved without having to have tight control over what is built where, with more control over public transit.
i say let the market solve the housing problem, and let cities/towns provide affordable housing locally for the community.
In my city we have a homeless shelter for people who need housing in rough times, we have social housing that’s more long term and stable and costs like 30 euros a month for an apartment and we also recently opened rent-controlled flats that are owned by the city and are rented out at cost.
And this is in a central european country with nowhere near the resources and richness of the US…
I am not so sure what I read. Is this an argument for corporate/fascist controlled housing abuses, or that of the collective?
I say this because both 🇺🇲 & 🇯🇵 no longer have a “market,” but a monopsony.
I plan to emigrate to Europe in hopes to bring more black anarchist thought and free housing until none are unhoused.
Both 🇺🇲 & 🇯🇵 outright genocide the unhoused.
Okay, can I just take my European ass and move into a malibu beach house for free then?
Who will decide who gets the free house where?
You can indeed. The State of California may not like it, and even deathcamp you, but that’s what “no borders” means in anarchism. Californians have yet to form anarchist solidarity.
The unhoused.
OT, Are you lost or something? Do you not read theory?