|
DrNutt posted:Can anyone who's on board with removing privately owned property/the rentier class point me in a good direction of some reading on how it could work, potentially? Sorry, I'm not about to try to present arguments for a strawman. If you want to talk about vacancy taxes, municipal incentivizing/regulation of low income housing integration and development, or the propagation of tenant's rights I'm sure you'll get a lot more action.
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 18:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 19:24 |
|
|
BrandorKP posted:It's obvious you haven't experienced the difference. The larger a business is the more systematic it tends to be. Businesses are systems that spit out money as they cycle. Larger businesses tend to have tighter, more standardized cycles that have been fully developed. They also try to make them more easily repeatable. They tend to gravitate towards going after the highest margin customers. Big property managers follow a script. There is a model, a system that the company operates by. It does things like plan for maintenence, have lawyers etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 18:23
|
|
|
IM DAY DAY IRL posted:Sorry, I'm not about to try to present arguments for a strawman. If you want to talk about vacancy taxes, municipal incentivizing/regulation of low income housing integration and development, or the propagation of tenant's rights I'm sure you'll get a lot more action. I'm not strawmanning. I'm just interested in reading about how you would prevent people from being stuck in shitholes in such a system. People are de facto stuck in shitholes in our current system, but people who have means can pretty much move wherever they want. I struggle with the idea that this can be solved under communism because people will still want to live in more desirable areas than less desirable areas. I'm looking for some perspective on how this can work. The Vienna pieces were interesting from a solving homelessness perspective, but it's still from a viewpoint of a rather limited geographical area.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:I'm not strawmanning. I know- I'm just saying that there are a myriad of progressive policies that should be discussed over the theoretical quagmire that is the abolishment of private property ownership. Sure, there is merit to the theory and a discussion of implementation tactics can be interesting but we're starting to get back into the "well, I know secession is unrealistic and nobody actually wants it but just for a moment let's discuss how it would happen" territory.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
IM DAY DAY IRL posted:I know- I'm just saying that there are a myriad of progressive policies that should be discussed over the theoretical quagmire that is the abolishment of private property ownership. Sure, there is merit to the theory and a discussion of implementation tactics can be interesting but we're starting to get back into the "well, I know secession is unrealistic and nobody actually wants it but just for a moment let's discuss how it would happen" territory. Oh, ok. I really am just hoping for some reading recommendations though, not trying to drag this thread into a quagmire of bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:Oh, ok. I really am just hoping for some reading recommendations though, not trying to drag this thread into a quagmire of bullshit. DrNutt posted:The Vienna pieces were interesting from a solving homelessness perspective, but it's still from a viewpoint of a rather limited geographical area. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
IM DAY DAY IRL posted:I know- I'm just saying that there are a myriad of progressive policies that should be discussed over the theoretical quagmire that is the abolishment of private property ownership. Sure, there is merit to the theory and a discussion of implementation tactics can be interesting but we're starting to get back into the "well, I know secession is unrealistic and nobody actually wants it but just for a moment let's discuss how it would happen" territory. You don't have to detail out exactly how society will look in order to work toward removing inequalities. Private property exists to benefit a minority ruling class, that is how our society is structured. Progressive reforms will never be able to change that structure. The ruling class wouldn't let them happen if they could. They can be helpful in the short term, but they should always be used to build a movement that fights to fundamentally change society. For example, the $15 minimum wage and tax on the rich are good, but the large masses of people brought into organizing though those reforms are the long term victory.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
Why don't we just kill everybody, but start at the top. Trickle down murder
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
DevNull posted:They can be helpful in the short term, but they should always be used to build a movement that fights to fundamentally change society. For example, the $15 minimum wage and tax on the rich are good, but the large masses of people brought into organizing though those reforms are the long term victory. I'm a huge advocate for inside out strategies that temper markets for long-term effective change. That being said I also feel that implementing an inside-out plan can be much more difficult if/when you allow your opponents to smear you with "extreme" labels. We can talk about (and, hopefully, implement) many of the policies I've mentioned by focusing on the merits of the programs and how they benefit the majority of the people. That's how you gain mass support for your initiatives and help generate built-in support for later policy. I believe we're on the same page, I just don't necessarily want to put all the cards on the table and have a movement be judged by the end goal.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
IM DAY DAY IRL posted:I'm a huge advocate for inside out strategies that temper markets for long-term effective change. That being said I also feel that implementing an inside-out plan can be much more difficult if/when you allow your opponents to smear you with "extreme" labels. We can talk about (and, hopefully, implement) many of the policies I've mentioned by focusing on the merits of the programs and how they benefit the majority of the people. That's how you gain mass support for your initiatives and help generate built-in support for later policy. I believe we're on the same page, I just don't necessarily want to put all the cards on the table and have a movement be judged by the end goal. For sure. This is the internet though, and discussion here can be a little more revolutionary than when we randomly meet someone at whatever anti-Trump march is going on this week.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 19:25
|
|
|
twodot posted:Ok so you're saying individuals display more variance in business than actual businesses? Like this is true, but who cares? We shouldn't treat an individual owner any differently just because there's a bigger chance they might individually be a grandma that bakes you cookies or a hardcore white supremacist than you would find in businesses. Are you just observing that two different things share some differences, but then concluding we should treat them exactly the same, but also it's super important we talk about how they are different? Because it's not equal. And if they are regulated as being the equal one will often be advantaged over the other. Which one do you want more of?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
Yeah, I'd like some more stuff, maybe longer than two short articles you can read in about ten minutes flat. Like, a book maybe? Maybe it's not a topic that's been explored that much, I don't know, that's why I asked for recommendations.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Because it's not equal. And if they are regulated as being the equal one will often be advantaged over the other. Which one do you want more of? You seem to be implying that grandma shouldn't be required to provide regular maintenance and other things that are to be expected of property management for renters, which is hosed up and stupid. Who gives a poo poo if it's a poor grandma or a sleazy slumlord, when you can't take a shower/do dishes/use appliances in your apartment?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:Yeah, I'd like some more stuff, maybe longer than two short articles you can read in about ten minutes flat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:You seem to be implying that grandma shouldn't be required to provide regular maintenance and other things that are to be expected of property management for renters, which is hosed up and stupid. Who gives a poo poo if it's a poor grandma or a sleazy slumlord, when you can't take a shower/do dishes/use appliances in your apartment? We make that distinction all the time. For example, we only forced corporations of a certain size to provide healthcare to employees. I do think grandma and the sleazy slumlord should be forced to keep up her unit properly if it's going to be rented. I'm just saying it's dumb to assert grandma is equal because she's charging a market rate for her unit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Because it's not equal. And if they are regulated as being the equal one will often be advantaged over the other. Which one do you want more of? twodot fucked around with this message at 21:23 on Oct 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
Munchables posted:Why don't we just kill everybody, but start at the top. Trickle down murder Sure, in theory it's a reasonable idea, but how long will the average low income household be waiting before the death vans show up for them? White suburbia will probably be getting purged left and right while minorities get ignored yet again. BrandorKP posted:We make that distinction all the time. For example, we only forced corporations of a certain size to provide healthcare to employees. This is also wrong and stupid, but we let it slide because "won't someone think of the job creators?"
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:This is also wrong and stupid, but we let it slide because "won't someone think of the job creators?"
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:Yeah, I'd like some more stuff, maybe longer than two short articles you can read in about ten minutes flat. The DSA thread in CSPAM will probably be able to help you out but you probably want something more general than specifically geared towards housing since so much of it will be intersectional to other aspects of society.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 21:57
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:You really should have just hosed off, saying you deserve more than a refugee/immigrant because you "worked hard" is different than saying "I'm proud of the hard work that I've done". Nobody deserves respect, everyone has struggles and/or perceived struggles, I don't deserve special treatment because I was poor and ended up here, certainly not any more than anyone else that got here through whatever path they took. So do you know how to read or do you just make poo poo up and what you see is like blurry braille with trigger words here and there. Show me the post where I suggest I "deserve more than immigrants." - you can't because I didn't. You literally just wait for me to leave then you say I said something I didn't + one personal attack (passive aggressive, directed at "some guy" - who is still in the room right in loving front of you). Please, please read my posts, I invite anyone, this is absurd at this point. I say one thing, you just distort it. What I think is, I think you pass judgement on people and that was my point. Is it based on race? Because the opinions you're saying I have don't match the opinions written on the page and that's upsetting me enough to come back and confront you repeatedly. In your own words no-one deserves respect. Again, you have plenty of respect for people who need handouts and none for people who just barely don't. Which would be fine, except you're going out of your way to active disrespect those people. So they're confronting you. Nowhere else I have moved has a special exclusionary title given to people who move there to alienate them and mark them as an acceptable target for any amount of harassment or personal attack, but here it is. FantasticExtrusion fucked around with this message at 23:59 on Oct 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 23:49
|
|
|
Munchables posted:Why don't we just kill everybody, but start at the top. Trickle down murder Sure, but where's the top? Vancouver BC seems like a good place to start.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 00:24
|
|
|
FantasticExtrusion posted:So what I was thinking was, you could Get Out. FantasticExtrusion posted:... In regards to cascadia, which triggered me like a tumblrite because it's really offensive. Like woo you're (we now, lol, since if I lied you'd never know I wasn't born here haha) so much better. FantasticExtrusion posted:So do you know how to read or do you just make poo poo up and what you see is like blurry braille with trigger words here and there. Show me the post where I suggest I "deserve more than immigrants." - you can't because I didn't. I read your stupid rear end posts: "Muse me how all refugees/immigrants are welcome but not American "transplants" who loving PAID their way here by working to earn it?" There is no misinterpreting this, you think people who "PAID" deserve to be here more than refugees and immigrants. You are a piece of poo poo and you admit to having mental problems, maybe you should get help. Nobody is "confronting" me, especially not you, you're just going on a goony tirade on an internet forum because you can't believe that someone might not give a poo poo if you "worked hard" or not. Everyone worked hard, you deserve nothing more than anyone else who ended up here, tough poo poo if you think you deserve it more than anyone else. ElCondemn fucked around with this message at 02:24 on Oct 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 02:20
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Because it's not equal. And if they are regulated as being the equal one will often be advantaged over the other. Which one do you want more of?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 03:13
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:Literally could not give less of a poo poo, aside from how they affect tenants. Does giving an advantage to one over the other lower rents, or improve housing in other ways? Yes? Then give an advantage to that one. No? Then they can all gently caress off, the guillotine doesn't give a poo poo what sort of ownership methodology your particular brand of landed gentry is using. What's that Ian M Banks line? "Money is a sign of poverty"
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 15:56
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:I read your stupid rear end posts: On top of having a pretty spectacular meltdown that dude loves to call people retard. Heh, must be a result of where he immigrated from.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 17:17
|
|
|
If anyone is interested, there is a party in north Seattle this Friday as a fund raiser and celebration of the 100 year anniversary of the October Revolution. https://www.facebook.com/events/177379279500268/ The will be cheap food and drinks, and we can plan out how to overthrow the greedy capitalists.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:This is also wrong and stupid, but we let it slide because "won't someone think of the job creators?" It's not inherantly good or bad, but tremendous good or bad can be done. Another example is farming, we structured our farming regulations to preference large corporate farms under Nixon. This basically killed small family farming. I guess this is how it relates to my objection. One can't say the two things are equal simply because they sell the same good in a market. Regulations have to be addressed in thier context in a system, and how they affect all parts of the system, not just the one thing they target. Twodot going: well they are the same because my ideology makes me dislike all rent seeking is dumb.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:It's not inherantly good or bad, but tremendous good or bad can be done. Another example is farming, we structured our farming regulations to preference large corporate farms under Nixon. This basically killed small family farming.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
Otherwise, you invariability run up into a supply issue with rent control and an affordability issue with by simply building market-rate housing. Yeah, the ultimate answer is probably affordable public housing connected to the rest of the city through high-capacity mass transit. It works in a lot of cities. (One of the biggest problems in the US is simply cars themselves. Highways are relatively inefficient ways of moving people around growing cities and even if you make the cities more high density, you still have the issue of everyone needing to be on the road. The answer as discussed at length is to simply better transit and while Seattle is trying obviously it is an uphill battle that will probably take decades. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 19:57 on Oct 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:(One of the biggest problems in the US is simply cars themselves. Highways are relatively inefficient ways of moving people around growing cities and even if you make the cities more high density, you still have the issue of everyone needing to be on the road. The answer as discussed at length is to simply better transit and while Seattle is trying obviously it is an uphill battle that will probably take decades.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
twodot posted:Yo, I'm still waiting for you to make an actual argument about a situation where we need to treat small property managers and large property managers differently. There is a difference between Berkshire Hathaway running a rental and random person renting out a condo. My arguement is those two things are different. I'm not arguing whether I think this policy is good or that one is bad. I'm pointing out a flawed assumption.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
DevNull posted:If anyone is interested, there is a party in north Seattle this Friday as a fund raiser and celebration of the 100 year anniversary of the October Revolution. Is this some ironic joke that's going over my head?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
Stop arguing about the loving squirrel.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Good transit is both very important and very expensive, you can also get low-hanging fruit by having mixed-use zoning + better support for walking/biking (which is a LOT cheaper than good transit) so that people can do many daily errands just in their own neighborhood without having to drive. That only goes so far though, it can improve some local traffic issues and increase density but at the end of the day, you are going to have a lot of commuters needing to go somewhere. There have been attempts at "decentralizing" CBDs but you still get plenty of cross-traffic that bogs down roadways. At the end of the day, you are going to have tons of people going across town. Also, the US especially doesn't seem to do small markets well, either it is some type of convenience store/liquor store or a full-scale supermarket. I live outside of the states and I have to say I appreciate being able to go to a local store and being able to get 80-90% of what I need. Portland has been on the forefront of mixed-use and bike use, but it hasn't helped with the amount of growth the city has seen (and that's even considering that Portland has one of the best mass-transit cities for a city of its size). Ideally, in other countries, you should have some type of high capacity transit with its own right of way within about .5-.75 miles of most of the population (this is obviously not the case in the states but it gives you an idea.) Ardennes fucked around with this message at 21:02 on Oct 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 20:57
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:I read your stupid rear end posts: You're missing the point, which is that I get treated like poo poo actively just for being a "transplant." Why am I the bad guy for moving here but not any of those people? I was trying to highlight hypocrisy, not imply that I work harder than anyone else. It's hypocritical to welcome everyone, even homeless heroin addicts, but to say to someone who picked themselves up and pays the rent: "you're garbage." I am literally the person you think you're defending after getting a leg up for the first time. I responded to this thread because people were saying nasty poo poo about people who move here. They're Nazis, they're having a meltdown, etc etc: the divisive hyperbole directed at me is at this point way worse than anything I said. You're putting words in my mouth and that's not fair, so I'm defending my own character within reason. I wouldn't have posted again but you included a personal attack about me as a side shot in am unrelated conversation after that topic had died down. I think if you learned more about me you'd like me, but I'm Hitler and you guys are figuratively branding people at first sight. See it's a tirade if I do it, but I've just been trying to get back to some civility for like 800 words. I used my big boy words too much so I'm immature. Americans are telling each other who belongs in which state, if that's how you want to live a lot of the world is divided up with smaller borders, which makes keeping everyone you don't like out a lot easier. That poo poo is the Nazi sentimentality, the attitude that you should choose who lives around you, that poo poo is what I was harping on. FantasticExtrusion fucked around with this message at 21:30 on Oct 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:There is a difference between Berkshire Hathaway running a rental and random person renting out a condo. My arguement is those two things are different. I'm not arguing whether I think this policy is good or that one is bad. I'm pointing out a flawed assumption. edit: Here's the person I quoted: Xand_Man posted:That's my point actually. The political rhetoric (some of which is in this very thread) that conflates small-scale property holders with large scale developers/property managers is pointlessly divisive. A single mother working in a warehouse doesn't become a class traitor because she makes some income off her old condo. edit2: I guess, charitably, I should offer a situation where failing to conflate these groups leads to a bad outcome: If we exempt small owners from safety laws, it will lead to the creation of unsafe housing, therefore both small and large owners should be subject to all relevant safety laws. twodot fucked around with this message at 21:08 on Oct 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
You're just rewriting it in your favor and choosing one interpretation despite the fact that I have clearly and explicitly stated multiple times I do not think I am better than nor deserve better treatment than immigrants. That was not the point.Peachfart posted:lol at the guy who wasn't born in the PNW that wants to succeed from the USA. Thanatosian posted:
[HYPOCRISY INTENSIFIES] Relevant Tangent posted:I didn't know he was a transplant. That explains a lot of the ignorance. ElCondemn posted:Growing up as a minority in Arizona I feel really lucky to live in Seattle, it's like living in a different country. FantasticExtrusion fucked around with this message at 21:24 on Oct 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 21:03
|
|
|
Soarer posted:Is this some ironic joke that's going over my head? No, we actually want to see the downfall of capitalism. The description is a bit silly, but we like to have fun while we organize.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 21:08
|
|
|
Never trust a revolutionary without a sense of humor. At worst they are unhinged, and at best, you don't win people over to radical politics by being a stick in the mud.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 19:24 |
|
|
Incidentally, if you're anywhere near Bellevue on Friday, consider protesting DeVos. She's going to be doing some kind of talk with the sort of vultures who are just thrilled to be stripping the flesh off of the public education system.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2017 21:20
|
|