• pearsaltchocolatebar
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 months ago

    So, grocery stores are morally wrong? I mean, food is a human right, isn’t it? What about hotels?

    Providing a necessary service in exchange for money isn’t morally wrong.

    Not everyone wants to own property. It’s a huge financial liability, and a pain in the ass, tbh. I actually know people who sold their homes and moved into apartments because they were sick of the time and money required to upkeep a house.

    While there are absolutely landlords who are immoral, especially corporate landlords, saying that being a landlord is inherently immoral is just incorrect.

    • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      I do agree that grocery stores are morally wrong in some sense yes. People should not have to lend their bodies in order to eat. Hotels aren’t morally wrong entirely, because they’re only providing a place to stay temporarily. If they did provide long term stay and charged for it than yes that would be morally wrong. You’ll note that I’m an anarchist.

      There is no such thing as a moral landlord. And the people you’re talking about downsized. The landlord does not do repairs, he hires handyman and trades workers to do repairs. The landlord collects a tax from you while giving you nothing in return. My rent is twice the monthly cost of a mortgage for a mini home in my area.

      When you have a mortgage the money isn’t gone when you spend it, it’s used to pay off your loan. When you’re done you own the property.

      I will never own this property. None of my money is returned to me. It is taken by a person or entity who literally does not provide me anything.

      I’ll repeat, providing shelter isn’t a service. What the landlord is providing you, is not evicting you so long as you provide them a taxation of your wages that goes straight into their pocket. If all landlords died overnight nothing would materially change except for all the people renting could now keep their wages, and hire the handyman to do the work themselves. Housing co-ops also cover the costs of upkeep by pooling money to spend. No, landlords are 100% immoral 100% of the time and your buddy who’s a good guy and a landlord might be a good guy but it has nothing to do with his being a landlord. Some cops save dying animals and volunteer at soup kitchens I’m sure, they’re all still bastards by participating in a system of militarized state violence.

      • jwiggler@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        For the record, I think most people confused about your position do not believe the basic principles your stance is based on, such as profit = wage theft. Would you say so, or am I putting words into your mouth?

      • pearsaltchocolatebar
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        You must know nothing about owning a home if you think rent just goes straight into a landlord’s pocket.

        Also, dealing with contractors is a service that’s being provided. Having to hire a contractor is often a pain in the ass.

        Having both rented and owned, renting is much less stressful. You apparently don’t see any value in not having to worry about maintenance, taxes, massive debt, liability, insurance, etc. which is fine, but that doesn’t mean paying for it is a scam.

        • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          My rent is 50% of my income I will never get back.

          No, renting is literally incomparably more stressful than owning a home would be where I could sell it at any time and get a portion of my invested income back.

          If I could opt out of my landlord calling the plumber when I need one, I sure as fuck would if it meant I could keep my money. No, my rent goes straight into his pocket every month and a fraction of a fraction ever comes out to cover upkeep. I’d happily opt out and pay it myself.

          You sound like you’re probably decently middle class. Which is fine and I’m not saying that you have no experience being a lower class renter. But you probably are not familiar with the same financial pressures we live under today.

          Landlords should not exist. Nothing would be lost if we converted every apartment building into a co-op. We would all have much more disposable income and much more control over where we lived.

        • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          You must know nothing about owning a home if you think rent just goes straight into a landlord’s pocket.

          Is the landlord making a profit? That comes from rent going into their pockets.

          that doesn’t mean paying for it is a scam.

          Choosing to pay for it, sure. Most renters would rather own but can’t because landlords have bought up a limited supply of a resource in order to profit off it. When scalpers do that they get vilified, but do that with something necessary for survival and for some reason it becomes an investment?

          “People with more money than sense would rather pay someone else to do it” is not a good argument for forcing everyone else to also pay someone else to do it.