squinch

the socioeconomic system these people exist to protect and exploit is the problem. Trump is a symptom. This happens anytime capitalism is in crisis, because it's an intrinsically authoritarian and totalitarian system. That's why american politics say "freedom" like it's a tic. They've rebranded it.

I’m going to become the Jovankler #over/under

what if every red cent over 100m went straight into public funds and we just gave them a yacht, and a hero of the union medal that says "i won" on it.

Think they'd go for that?

YouTube video by Key & Peele When a Text Conversation Goes Very Wrong - Key & Peele

I'm also realizing that i swear and emphasize a lot which might make me look angry. I'm not, i just write how i talk for the most part.

youtu.be/sngRrkQayDA?...

I don't think bluesky, like twitter before, is a good forum for these discussions. I'm sure your position has more nuance than you're able to fit into x characters, because I know mine does and it's frustrating trying to communicate my actual point. But comrades are worth the attempt. Fascists arent

That's true, hence price fixing, discrimination, fighting against housing being a universal right, and the constant race to the highest price at the lowest cost. Market pressures rarely put obstacles in the way of shitty exploitative predators, but often put obstacles in the way of people with souls

I'm saying that we shouldn't focus on fixing the market because the market is the problem.

I didn't say it wasn't A factor, I'm saying it's not THE problem, and more supply isn't THE solution. I've acknowledged multiple times supply is a factor, just that it's artificially constrained. is it possible we're talking past each other? My problem is the SYSTEM THAT MAKES IT A FACTOR.

Under what circumstances will these people allow more homes to be built, may I ask? In a way that results in a more equitable country?

And if we can just go around, above, or through them anyway... why not just wash our hands with the whole fucking racket?

I genuinely hope you're seeing my point

And you're suggesting that if you build more houses, the people who
- own all the property
- write all the laws
- manipulate the market for extreme profit
- are actively targeting minorities

will just go "I would have gotten away with it too if it weren't for you meddling contractors!"

And every time it goes between tenants, why does rent continue to climb? The number of units didn't change. Why does it not go back down when the house renters the "market"?

BECAUSE SUPPLY
IS NOT
THE PROBLEM.

Capitalism is. The commodification of everything is. the complete and utter failure of public infrastructure and the dominance of corporate manufactured transportation options functioning as a cartel is. Etc., etc., etc., etc.. How'd you GET here? "The market"?

How 100,000 Apartments in New York City Disappeared (Published 2023)

And let's talk about JUST NYC, which is in fact facing a supply issue, that is completely self inflicted, and worse, still a result other, much larger, much more important issues affecting nearly EVERYWHERE else. You aren't just not building them. You're losing them.
www.nytimes.com/2023/10/19/n...

and that doesn't include rentals, does it? That's just houses-- and each one of those can fit more than one person? Unless you're talking about NYC, specifically, in which case it's still debatable, but then, why are you saying wed have to ship them to Indiana?

Debatable, but if true (and not true like "amount of people lifted out of poverty" or "gdp is the best indicator of freedom and happiness" or "we spread(economic) freedom and (illusory) democracy"), in the place YOU live, that's

25,000+ homes. In one place.

And again-- not the core issue.

Enjoy your corporate panopticon while you campaign to give them more money to build low quality homes and still have homeless people.

Oh, I wasn't aware my social media presence on fuckin Bluesky is a valid measure of the legitimacy of my position or ability to articulate it.

No wonder this country is so fucked.

WE HAVE HOUSING. Flip it. NO RIGHT. ONLY HOUSING.

That's your *literal* position. You are suggesting it's a market inventory problem, there are just so many people clamoring for homes and OopS! WhErEd aLL tHe HoMeS gO!? If we just build more that'll lower prices!

It's a bandaid on a severed limb.

A.) We already have the housing. B.) Building more housing and not changing the system will result in more homes no one can afford, not lower prices, C.) no transit or good jobs is part of the same issue. once again, you are missing the forest for the trees trying to "own" me instead of thinking.

The Khmer Rogue is but one example of this country finding the cash for the forced relocation of multitudes for the purposes of genocide, war, and theft, yes. Are you forgetting who actually fought them, vs who backed them and delegitimized the former's cries for justice?

And also, this country is more than capable of moving thousands of people and spending billions and changing laws without anyone asking for the purpose of war and genocide and theft. Blank check for that. But food? Housing? Education? Healthcare? Hell no, who's looking out for the shareholders?

I think a lot of people would absolutely take that deal. But yeah, because i personally don't have the means to bus thousands of people to one town.... I can't stress this enough. If housing were a guarantee, *you wouldn't have to*. BECAUSE SUPPLY IS NOT THE PROBLEM.

hey, why are so many people trying to find other places to rent anyway? arent they already living somewhere? And what happens to the places they leave, is that home just forever out of the equation? Or does rent immediately skyrocket the second the contract ends because everyone else is raising rent

Why does the percentage of vacant homes matter more than the fact than the total amount of them outnumbers homeless people or the fact that landlords can charge basically whatever anyway? Because a lot of people are looking to get out of their current rent? "You can always work somewhere else" right

This country put single homeless person into a house or apartment right now, with the housing we have. If we gave a shit about our citizens, and like turned fucking golf courts into public housing, we could do it in areas they actually want to be. But we won't. Because SUPPLY IS NOT THE PROBLEM.

And who's estimating those numbers anyway? How are they doing so? Can you think of any other thing like that where estimates range from 2500 to over 90,000? And that's for very, very specific criteria.

That sounds like a tiny number until you think about how many units exist.

And people aren't outbidding each other with money they actually have on hand. And all of that money they pay in rent funnels up-- which prevents them from saving if they ever DID want to buy property. It's almost like hoarding property and extorting people who need shelter for profit is the problem

In the YoOL 2025 we should stop trying to fix a problem directly caused by capitalism and other violent totalitarian socioeconomic structures by giving capitalists taxpayer dollars to build more cheaply made single family houses only they can afford to "increase supply". Housing should be a right.