Billionaire Peter Thiel warns if you ‘proletarianize the young people,’ don’t be surprised they end up communist

[QP!]

It's almost as if MAGATs think that what goes on in NYC or California is contagious or something, eh? lol

Terry and Damo do the same thing constantly. They will act like it such a huge offense that someone bought Hunters paintings, because it could POSSIBLE impact what he brought to Joe, as an issue and what Joe listened too.

But when it comes to Trump and his kids getting billions upon billions, they will tell you that should not be brought up or refuse to discuss it.

It is almost as if they have zero principles behind their positions and things are only right or wrong based on a partisan label.

 

[cawacko]

News flash, price caps and rent freezes don't make real estate more expensive. Here's a good review as to cause: www.publications.lawschool.cornell.edu/jlpp/2024/11/13/why-is-new-york-city-rent-so-high-even-with-rent-control-laws-in-place/

Apropos to that:
SCRIE has been around since 1973
DRIE has been around since 2005

Can Mamdani deliver 100%? Given the imbedded greed/corruption within the NYC real estate system, I'll be impressed if he makes a 1/3 dent. But the point is the narrative he voices straight up and unapologetic that changes the conversation for the future.

Rent control is certainly not new, you are correct. And rent control can help the individual who receive it. But on the whole, economic data clearly shows that it causes landlords to be less likely in keep up the quality of their properties and build new supply. That's what causes prices to rise.

Mamdani struck a chord with his "the rent is too high rhetoric". And on the surface, rent freezes sound great. But the results show otherwise. Liberal economists will say the same thing, so this isn't just some partisan thing either.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Terry and Damo do the same thing constantly. They will act like it such a huge offense that someone bought Hunters paintings, because it could POSSIBLE impact what he brought to Joe, as an issue and what Joe listened too.

But when it comes to Trump and his kids getting billions upon billions, they will tell you that should not be brought up or refuse to discuss it.

It is almost as if they have zero principles behind their positions and things are only right or wrong based on a partisan label.

The Crypto scam will be seen as one of the greatest, most corrupt scams ever perpetrated by a sitting President.

https://www.fbi.gov/how-we-can-help-you/victim-services/national-crimes-and-victim-resources/cryptocurrency-investment-fraud

Cryptocurrency Investment Fraud​

Cryptocurrency investment fraud, which the media commonly describes as "pig butchering," is one of the most prevalent and damaging fraud schemes today.

 

[QP!]

The Crypto scam will be seen as one of the greatest, most corrupt scams ever perpetrated by a sitting President.

https://www.fbi.gov/how-we-can-help-you/victim-services/national-crimes-and-victim-resources/cryptocurrency-investment-fraud

Cryptocurrency Investment Fraud​

Cryptocurrency investment fraud, which the media commonly describes as "pig butchering," is one of the most prevalent and damaging fraud schemes today.

That so many prior republicans, and today magats ignore the above shows how deep a cult this is and it really outs who are the members of this cult.

If this was a Democrat POTUS, like Obama or Joe doing this, i think @Damocles and @T. A. Gardner would be calling for literal civil war or the country to break up if the Dem DOJ and COngress was simply ignoring it.

They would be outraged and feel that outrage was just and needed to protect the country. And yet the same Damo and Terry and other cultist cannot find a way to give two fucks because it is Trump.

It proves what i say often which is magats TRULY do not have a single principled or moral position. This level of corruption... coddling Pedophiles and groomers... and so on and so... the only thing matters to magats as to whether it is right or wrong to do is whether the person doing it has an 'R' or a 'D'.

It is truly sad. Especially since they have most of the religious people who like to pretend they are morally centered, in their world view.

 

[cawacko]

That so many prior republicans, and today magats ignore the above shows how deep a cult this is and it really outs who are the members of this cult.

If this was a Democrat POTUS, like Obama or Joe doing this, i think @Damocles and @T. A. Gardner would be calling for literal civil war or the country to break up if the Dem DOJ and COngress was simply ignoring it.

They would be outraged and feel that outrage was just and needed to protect the country. And yet the same Damo and Terry and other cultist cannot find a way to give two fucks because it is Trump.

It proves what i say often which is magats TRULY do not have a single principled or moral position. This level of corruption... coddling Pedophiles and groomers... and so on and so... the only thing matters to magats as to whether it is right or wrong to do is whether the person doing it has an 'R' or a 'D'.

It is truly sad. Especially since they have most of the religious people who like to pretend they are morally centered, in their world view.

This thread went off the rails fast. What are your thoughts on the idea in the OP that younger people find socialism more appealing because of the high cost of real estate (and student debt)?

 

[QP!]

This thread went off the rails fast. What are your thoughts on the idea in the OP that younger people find socialism more appealing because of the high cost of real estate (and student debt)?

it is not 'off the rails' to address the other issues that flow out of conversation.

Meaning if you are railing against 'something someone is doing based on your view of socialism being wrong', then raising your aforementioned views or avoidance of views on other 'socialism' you support or ignore is absolutely appropriate. It helps determine if the person you are discussing it with come to this conversation honestly, and thus you can debate on the merits or just dogmatically and partisan, and thus facts won't matter, as they come at the argument dishonestly (@Damocles and @T. A. Gardner ).

To your specific question, "socialism" in this case is just a place holder for 'Try another path'. Young people RIGHTLY recognize that over decades the game has been rigged by the older generation, who because they voted in much higher numbers were able to buy the votes of politicians that have slowly and consistently transferred wealth accumulation by those over age 50, as they headed into retirement years, from those below age 50, in their core working years.

It has been a slow moving train wreck that few noticed but is now hitting crisis levels as more and more younger people have almost no chance at things like home ownership or wealth that exceeds their parents, as all prior generations had and the singular path to wealth for many is to wait for their parents to die and to inherit.

 

[Nordberg]

This thread went off the rails fast. What are your thoughts on the idea in the OP that younger people find socialism more appealing because of the high cost of real estate (and student debt)?

It is bigger than that. The concentration of wealth in the top bracket is obscene. It makes them arrogant and they spout off too much. Musk should be more thoughtful. Socialism is just the government providing services to the people, like universal healthcare and free education. It is not a big ask to get those things. But the wealthy will fight like hell to take all they can out of the system. Money =power. They have accomplished their goal and the people are not pleased. Younger people want the American experiment to work as intended. The people have the power and we want them to work for the public good.

 

[cawacko]

it is not 'off the rails' to address the other issues that flow out of conversation.

Meaning if you are railing against 'something someone is doing based on your view of socialism being wrong', then raising your aforementioned views or avoidance of views on other 'socialism' you support or ignore is absolutely appropriate. It helps determine if the person you are discussing it with come to this conversation honestly, and thus you can debate on the merits or just dogmatically and partisan, and thus facts won't matter, as they come at the argument dishonestly (@Damocles and @T. A. Gardner ).

To your specific question, "socialism" in this case is just a place holder for 'Try another path'. Young people RIGHTLY recognize that over decades the game has been rigged by the older generation, who because they voted in much higher numbers were able to buy the votes of politicians that have slowly and consistently transferred wealth accumulation by those over age 50, as they headed into retirement years, from those below age 50, in their core working years.

It has been a slow moving train wreck that few noticed but is now hitting crisis levels as more and more younger people have almost no chance at things like home ownership or wealth that exceeds their parents, as all prior generations had and the singular path to wealth for many is to wait for their parents to die and to inherit.

I 100% get their frustration. I hear it as well when talking to young people. Unfortunately for them, the path they're choosing is what has contributed to this divide. It's a doubling down on what hasn't worked.

The YIMBY movement started in San Francisco but has moved on to other cities. They're progressives who recognize the need for zoning changes and more supply to bring down housing prices. Politically it's fascinating because the NIMBY-YIMBY divide doesn't break down neatly along partisan lines. But policy wise, it challenges the mindset of people still living metaphorically in 1980 who don’t want change in their neighborhoods. That resistance is what’s really driven this problem.

 

[Lionfish]

Not quite.

Socialism is an economic system based on socially sharing by force. It is also what Karl Marx desired.

It has three major forms:

Fascism, or government manipulation of markets. Government tells you what you can buy, how much you can charge for it, when and where you can operate your business, who you must hire, who you must fire...in short you take the risk of getting your business going and they come and tell you how to run it. They assume none of the risk that you took. It is the first stepping stone on the way to:

Communism, or government ownership of markets. The steal from capitalists (the only ones producing wealth), and take it for themselves (maybe chuck a few pennies to the 'poor', as they define them). It is the second stepping stone on the way to:

Slavery, or ownership of people.

ALL socialism is based on theft of wealth. It cannot exist without capitalism to steal from. Once it runs out of places to steal from, it collapses.

 

[cawacko]

It is bigger than that. The concentration of wealth in the top bracket is obscene. It makes them arrogant and they spout off too much. Musk should be more thoughtful. Socialism is just the government providing services to the people, like universal healthcare and free education. It is not a big ask to get those things. But the wealthy will fight like hell to take all they can out of the system. Money =power. They have accomplished their goal and the people are not pleased. Younger people want the American experiment to work as intended. The people have the power and we want them to work for the public good.

I get the frustration people have, but this idea that everything can be free is a pipe dream. Since this thread started with real estate, I’ll stick to that. Real estate plays a big role in wealth inequality, and the system is set up to benefit older people and existing homeowners who fight hard to resist change.

You also see younger people, often democratic socialists, argue that developers only want profit so we shouldn’t build new market rate housing. They add that it would gentrify their neighborhoods, so they prefer only government or non-profit housing.

The problem is that those projects often cost close to a million dollars per unit, which makes it impossible to scale and meet demand. Yet that rhetoric keeps getting repeated even though it makes the problem worse.

 

[Nordberg]

I get the frustration people have, but this idea that everything can be free is a pipe dream. Since this thread started with real estate, I’ll stick to that. Real estate plays a big role in wealth inequality, and the system is set up to benefit older people and existing homeowners who fight hard to resist change.

You also see younger people, often democratic socialists, argue that developers only want profit so we shouldn’t build new market rate housing. They add that it would gentrify their neighborhoods, so they prefer only government or non-profit housing.

The problem is that those projects often cost close to a million dollars per unit, which makes it impossible to scale and meet demand. Yet that rhetoric keeps getting repeated even though it makes the problem worse.

Who has that idea? Who said everything should be free? If you can do that, I will respond. The wild rhetoric is yours.

 

[QP!]

It is bigger than that. The concentration of wealth in the top bracket is obscene. It makes them arrogant and they spout off too much. Musk should be more thoughtful. Socialism is just the government providing services to the people, like universal healthcare and free education. It is not a big ask to get those things. But the wealthy will fight like hell to take all they can out of the system. Money =power. They have accomplished their goal and the people are not pleased. Younger people want the American experiment to work as intended. The people have the power and we want them to work for the public good.

And beyond that it is better for the country.

The reason the US outpaced all other nations, post WW2, is because the wealth accrual was more evenly split between the uber rich and middle class and below. It was UNDERSTOOD, as Henry Ford said, that he 'wanted his employees to be able to afford his cars'.

This gutting of the MC and below only hurts America more long term.

Some Oligarchs do not care about that, thinking as long as they get theirs that is all that matters, but you can argue if they were more patient and allowed the MC to and below to also grow, and not decline in wealth, the Oligarchs would get even more rich.

You can look at this in the context of how China has chosen to grow versus Russia. China, while allowing top Oligarchs to get super rich has also ensured the MC and below are massively increasing their wealth and thus spending. They foresee that building ALL OF THE PEOPLE is the best long term plan to riches and power. Whereas Russia, like Trump , take the short kleptocracy view. Grab all you can now at the expense of everyone else.

 

[Lionfish]

The Crypto scam will be seen as one of the greatest, most corrupt scams ever perpetrated by a sitting President.

https://www.fbi.gov/how-we-can-help-you/victim-services/national-crimes-and-victim-resources/cryptocurrency-investment-fraud

Cryptocurrency Investment Fraud​

Cryptocurrency investment fraud, which the media commonly describes as "pig butchering," is one of the most prevalent and damaging fraud schemes today.

Anybody forcing you to buy in?

 

[cawacko]

Who has that idea? Who said everything should be free? If you can do that, I will respond. The wild rhetoric is yours.

You mentioned universal (read: free) healthcare and free education, and Mamdani’s platform included free buses and childcare. That’s what I meant when I said the idea that everything can be free is a pipe dream. Those are the examples.

But setting that aside this thread started about real estate, which plays a huge role in inequality. You haven’t addressed that part of what I wrote.

 

[Into the Night]

hawkeye doesn't know.

His problem. Hawkeye is only one person.

 

[Freddy Figbottom]

You mentioned universal (read: free) healthcare and free education, and Mamdani’s platform included free buses and childcare. That’s what I meant when I said the idea that everything can be free is a pipe dream. Those are the examples.

But setting that aside this thread started about real estate, which plays a huge role in inequality. You haven’t addressed that part of what I wrote.

nordberg is retarded.

you're stressing him out.

 

[Into the Night]

Rent control is certainly not new, you are correct. And rent control can help the individual who receive it.

It does not. It causes shortages in housing.

But on the whole, economic data clearly shows that it causes landlords to be less likely in keep up the quality of their properties and build new supply. That's what causes prices to rise.

This part is correct. There is no incentive to maintain a property if a landlord is forced to lose money on it.

Mamdani struck a chord with his "the rent is too high rhetoric". And on the surface, rent freezes sound great. But the results show otherwise. Liberal economists will say the same thing, so this isn't just some partisan thing either.

 

[Into the Night]

That so many prior republicans, and today magats ignore the above shows how deep a cult this is and it really outs who are the members of this cult.

If this was a Democrat POTUS, like Obama or Joe doing this, i think @Damocles and @T. A. Gardner would be calling for literal civil war or the country to break up if the Dem DOJ and COngress was simply ignoring it.

They would be outraged and feel that outrage was just and needed to protect the country. And yet the same Damo and Terry and other cultist cannot find a way to give two fucks because it is Trump.

It proves what i say often which is magats TRULY do not have a single principled or moral position. This level of corruption... coddling Pedophiles and groomers... and so on and so... the only thing matters to magats as to whether it is right or wrong to do is whether the person doing it has an 'R' or a 'D'.

It is truly sad. Especially since they have most of the religious people who like to pretend they are morally centered, in their world view.

DEMOCRATS called for civil war for a while now.
It's here, Kewpie. It's being fought on the streets right now.

And Democrat rioters, looters, and insurrectionists are losing.

 

[QP!]

I 100% get their frustration. I hear it as well when talking to young people. Unfortunately for them, the path they're choosing is what has contributed to this divide. It's a doubling down on what hasn't worked.

The YIMBY movement started in San Francisco but has moved on to other cities. They're progressives who recognize the need for zoning changes and more supply to bring down housing prices. Politically it's fascinating because the NIMBY-YIMBY divide doesn't break down neatly along partisan lines. But policy wise, it challenges the mindset of people still living metaphorically in 1980 who don’t want change in their neighborhoods. That resistance is what’s really driven this problem.

Trump rightly recognized what Steve Bannon and Bernie Sanders have been saying for years.

The most powerful voting block, is the populist one that rarely showed up to vote, as they thought the game was too rigged to matter and that the UBer rich and corporations had it locked up.

That is not true.

The biggest danger to the uber rich and Corporations was always a Trump type (a rich person who truly wanted to make change but not just lie and fake it as Trump did) or some Bernie or Steve Bannon type populist drawing out the populist vote crossing prior partisan lines. Again, what Trump did, but did so in a lie.

Bannon was actually saying he would run on this front before Trump started saying he might run again to shut everyone else out.

 

[cawacko]

Trump rightly recognized what Steve Bannon and Bernie Sanders have been saying for years.

The most powerful voting block, is the populist one that rarely showed up to vote, as they thought the game was too rigged to matter and that the UBer rich and corporations had it locked up.

That is not true.

The biggest danger to the uber rich and Corporations was always a Trump type (a rich person who truly wanted to make change but not just lie and fake it as Trump did) or some Bernie or Steve Bannon type populist drawing out the populist vote crossing prior partisan lines. Again, what Trump did, but did so in a lie.

Bannon was actually saying he would run on this front before Trump started saying he might run again to shut everyone else out.

No disagreement here about the growing populism we see on both the right and left that you call out.

Since this thread was largely about housing, and it's a space I'm familiar with, it's what I've been speaking to. What's interesting about housing is political labels often get dropped quickly. Someone wants to build in a neighborhood, people unite like they are multi-generational families in opposition. It's no longer R vs. D, it's like people are a gang uniting to protect themselves.

We've had decades of that which has led us to where buying a home, the "American Dream", is out of reach for so many. That alone isn't what's causing this populist movement, but it's certainly playing a role in it.