• ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    People who complain that Lemmy is full of tankies have never seen the comment section of a meme making fun of landlords. I’m convinced Lemmy is actually full of landlords.

      • Lewd Ian@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        There aren’t any. The ones they linked below have maybe 2 out of 70+ comments defending them. I can’t tell if ImplyingImplicatior and ObviouslyNotBananas are dumb as bricks or being sarcastic.

      • ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Hopefully this link works https://lemmy.world/post/5022932

        If not, try searching for “Landlord Party In Berkeley Ends In Fights” and then scroll to the negative comments. In my search, it seems like the landlord supporters have gotten quiet recently. Probably because they were downvoted so much lol

    • Perfide@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Where tho? Everyone is clearly taking the piss out of the meme and pretending to agree with it. Nobody is actually out there tipping their landlord(well, I sure fucking hope not at least…).

  • VonReposti@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Complaining about landlords feel weird to me as I love my landlord. But they are a nonprofit organisation, so that definitely helps.

  • Alteon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Sorry OP, not everyone is as much of a sourpuss as you when it comes to hating landlords. I understand that the problem is not with landlords that own a second or even third house, but with people and corporations that own 5+ houses. They are the ones that are hoarding the stock and using it as a “get, rich, quick” investment scheme. You want to be mad, then atleast be mad at the right people.

    Sorry you can’t afford a house OP, but I’m not okay with you demonizing regular people that have worked their asses off to be able to afford a second house, and rented out their starter home. Does that make me “fucking love” landlords? No, it just means I’m being a rational fucking adult about it.

    Edit: ITT: The 99% fighting over the scraps that the 1% leave behind, whilst doing their best to fuck over one another.

    Fuck me for wanting financial stability, I guess.

    • twopi@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You contradicted yourself. Op can’t get a starter home but the starter home he would have bought is held hostage by the “smol” landlord. Pick one.

      • rothaine@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think the reason is “I don’t want to have to work until I die” actually.

        Investment property is one of the few remaining ladders of social mobility. Does it suck that it doesn’t extend down far enough? Yes. But removing it as an option just further widens the gap between the billionaires and everyone else.

        Where’s that meme with the oreos

        • twopi@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you have half the population each have 1 investment property. You must have the other half renters. You literally want to create two classes. Those with investment properties and those with no property. One class above another. You’re just using billionaires as a shield. You want to put yourself in a class above other people.

          We should all work so that each person has one home.

          And the “I don’t want to work until I die” should be covered by social insurance/social security instead of making someone else a renter.

          • rothaine@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Your argument assumes there’s no utility in renting, which is simply not true. A house is a PITA to maintain; stuff breaks all the time. Also, moving when you own the place is much more difficult, and some people value the flexibility of being able to hop from one part of the country to another. If we rewind 12 years, back before rent prices and housing costs went batshit insane, it was a perfectly reasonable option to rent instead of own, even if you could afford otherwise. Rent was basically paying for the service of not needing to maintain a building and not locking yourself down.

            Those with investment properties and those with no property. One class above another. You’re just using billionaires as a shield. You want to put yourself in a class above other people.

            Do you realize how much money a billion dollars is? One class above another, like a walk up a hill – and then the billionaire class is on a fucking space station. Again, I’m reminded of the Oreos meme.

            And yet again, owning housing does not indicate wealth in a “normal” housing market, so your supposed rent/own class division isn’t even true. Very wealthy people can still be renters. Or do you think “landlords” can afford to rent a penthouse in Manhattan?

            And the “I don’t want to work until I die” should be covered by social insurance/social security

            Well it’s not. So make that a reality before attacking people for trying to better their situation.

            • twopi@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              I really, really want to see that Oreo meme you’re talking about.

              Also about not wanting to be tied down. I totally get it. You know what fixes that? Co-operative housing. Some links: https://campus.coop/ (Toronto) https://www.nasco.coop/ (North America) https://www.studenthomes.coop/ (United Kingdom)

              These are housing cooperatives for the most mobile population: students. And you know what? No need for landlords what so ever, while still providing location mobility and the possibility of hiring an external management team or (using democracy) elect amongst yourselves. Again disproving your very point.

              I really like housing cooperatives but we have way too few of them. As a young professional moving between cities it would be great.

              What do you get from a landlord owning housing as opposed to housing cooperatives? (This is the [only] question I want you to answer)

              I can tell you what you get from cooperatives that you don’t get from landlords. You don’t have to pay for an ROI for the landlord. That is it. Same maintenance costs. Similar price for home to start but better for the inhabitants.

              Do you realize how much money a billion dollars is?

              Not relevant, stop using billionaires as a shield.

              One class above another, like a walk up a hill – and then the billionaire class is on a fucking space station. Again, I’m reminded of the Oreos meme.

              Again not relevant. To use your metaphore I don’t want a space station and I don’t want a hill. You on the other hand want a hill (and you being the king on the hill) but no space station. I say no to both.

              Again I want that Oreos meme.

              Well it’s not. So make that a reality before attacking people for trying to better their situation.

              Well maybe it would be if people who “invest” in real estate don’t oppose increasing or bettering social insurance. Those who are the biggest proponents of real estate investors are the biggest opponents of social insurance. Social insurance comes from general taxation of working people. Those people (like you) want to move the money working people pay to taxes for general social insurance and instead pay all that money towards rent that landlords (like you) control. You are literally moving money from general social insurance to your own pockets. And both young people and actual poor old people suffer. You do not oppose tyranny. You want to become the tyrant.

              Another option is a Community Land Trust (CLT). Community owned land which is similar but under a different structure with a wider ownership structure. https://www.communityland.ca/ (Canada)

              And guess what? With CLTs you can actually invest yourself if you don’t live inside it, because a broader ownership structure and you don’t have to be a landlord. Awesome!!! Oh wow!

              Try it in your city! Here’s one from mine https://www.oclt.ca/invest/ (Ottawa, ON, Canada)