Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I think it is a bad idea and will incentivize landlords to literally raise the rent with the UBI money amount.
We need rent control and anti monopoly practices.
If you have five people who want houses in place X, and there are four houses in place X, something has to give. The government could choose which of the five gets kicked out of place X (rent control does this, basically), the government could force the four houses be demolished and replaced with more, smaller houses (the character of place X would change, which probably no one wants), rents could rise until one person decides going to live somewhere else is their best option or two people decide being roommates is their best option. In none of these situations do the five people who want one of the four existing houses all get what they want.
If a popular, growing community has a plan for housing densification, but it's going to take five years to build out, rent control is a reasonable bridge policy to keep the community together while the construction happens. But this idea that rent control can somehow by itself solve the underlying problem of not enough housing units in the places people want to live is a pipe dream.
Yes to antimonopoly practices. But rent control is well known to be an extremely problematic policy. It encourages developers to not develop more housing, and encourages landlords to not fix known problems. A far better solition is a Georgist land value tax, which completely removes the ability of landlords to profit off of the value of the land itself.
My brother in christ, do you think landlords make rent proportional to people’s income right now?
They charge as much as people can pay.
Yes, that is literally why the housing crisis exists. Landlords (think Blackrock and other mega corporations, not local landlords). Are trying to prevent the building of housing and bribing government officials to do so in order to create an artificial shortage.
This is because housing is a primary human need and a very small shortage will drive up the price immensely. Combine this with borowing and usury and you have yourself the perfect extortion combination.
Everyone knows since the sixties that government housing is the solution to all of this and there is a reason capitalists are making up every excuse under the moon to prevent the government from doing that again.
You literally just explained how it is a function of supply (through an artificial shortage), not income. It’s lack of competition between landlords (whether through corporate landlords buying up millions of units or lots of little landlords using RealPage to engage in collusion via algorithm), and not discretionary.
On average, people don’t pay more than a third of their income for groceries because there’s still competition in the grocery space (which is also why it was so important that Lina Khan blocked the Kroger-Albertson’s merger).
We can hate landlords and capitalism without saying nonsense about UBI.