Reply With QuoteMicawber (10-08-2019)
Diversity Makes Greatness
What you call an 'anti-capitalism screed' is a call to properly manage our capitalism instead of letting it run amok.Originally Posted by cawacko
I am not anti-capitalism, as I have said multitudes of times.
I am a proponent of using our heads to control, manage and guide capitalism in order to produce a better lifestyle.
But I know I could say that till I'm blue in the face and you would call it anti-capitalism.
Why don't you just listen to me instead of trying to translate it into conservative-talk?
Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.
Micawber (10-08-2019)
Verified User
Cwacky, you know he is right. He is bemoaning the nature of capitalism (it exploits in its nature) and you are comparing the parts as if there is real choice. Here is the part where you are totally full of shit:
yes there are random times when people choose to rent who are people of means, but the fact remains everyone wants to OWN stuff, not rent it from another guy who OWNS it.
Capitalism? It's the worst system in the world, except for all the others. That's what you guys agree upon and yet are going round and round debating.
Every capitalist who dreams of acquiring 10 million (pick your lifestyle number) so he or she can "put his money to work" instead of actually working is dreaming of the intrinsic
problem with capitalism. EXPLOITATION. Get to a position where you can do nothing and get paid. The necessary side effect of that is that someone else is doing your share of the work.
The problem with capitalism is that wealth ALONE can provide an income, and hard work can in many case barely provide three square meals and a roof.
I don't know where this screed leaves your argument but I do know that it is true. Just look out your window every day all day. Check out the street mumblers.
Only the well off who own think renting is a choice.
Last edited by Micawber; 10-08-2019 at 10:03 PM.
Insane Level of Addiction
One is free to have a (long) debate over capitalism and socialism.
The discussion was originally about owning vs renting a home. It's an old school mentality to think you have to own a home. Not everyone is in a financial position to own or even wants to own based on the lifestyle they live.
The premise of my points in this thread are what can be done to lower housing costs to allow more people to own. We saw what happened in the 'aughts when we tried to increase home ownership. That didn't work out to well for most of us. But that was all about the financing. It didn't address the structural issues which cause housing costs to rise.
If you or Poli or anyone have concrete points you want to make about how we can make housing more affordable to own for the masses I'm definitely open to hearing them.
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello cawacko,
Actually I once heard a proposal for a program where the government builds homes for sale. This would provide affordable housing, and an avenue for many who would not otherwise be able to afford ownership. And it could be done for no net expense to the government. The only requirement would be that the homes sell for at least as much as it cost to build them.
For a region where property values are escalating beyond the reach of all but the rich, this could act to dampen inflation by introducing numerous affordable units onto the market.
Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.
Insane Level of Addiction
That will never happen because the private sector can build homes cheaper than the government can.
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello cawacko,
I don't see how.
The private sector has to make a profit.
The government only has to break even.
The amount of the profit is the amount that the government can do it cheaper.
Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.
Insane Level of Addiction
For starters, if this was the case it would already be occurring. It's not like someone woke up in 2019 and said "I have a novel concept, what if the government built all new housing..."
Because one doesn't have to make a profit doesn't necessarily mean they can do it better or cheaper.
Depending on how interested you are in the topic you can read all kinds of history of governments raising billions in bond money to build "affordable housing" and how little they actually produced.
eternal
libertarian scum
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello cawacko,
It is exactly the kind of thing FDR would have done.
Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.
Insane Level of Addiction
There are some today who view history through a woke 2019 lens. From that perspective FDR was a straight up racist as while under his watch the FHA was created and segregated America's housing using redlining, which still affects us to this day.
In FDR's defense I'm a believer that we as humans are all flawed and are a product of our time. Someone 50 years from now can look at a person who thinks they are woke today and say today's person is racist, sexist or whatever else based on future norms. But that's getting off the point.
FDR was President for four terms. If it's something he would have done why didn't he do it? And I'm missing how that's relevant to today.
Posting Rules
Bookmarks