this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2025
1336 points (96.9% liked)

Political Memes

7585 readers
3002 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago (2 children)

There are literally amendments to the Constitution preventing this from happening have you all lost your mind!

[–] Probius@sopuli.xyz 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Why do we have to pretend the constitution matters when our enemies don't?

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 0 points 6 days ago

Ummm... Because our enemies don't... 🤷

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

They're just kids living out a simplistic power fantasy. "If I were king of the world, I'd solve this huge, intractable problem with a simple order". Like Mao ordering all the sparrows to be killed. Hopefully, once they experience the world a little, they realize that big problems are big because they're difficult and complicated to solve.

[–] Probius@sopuli.xyz 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Housing is more complex and the proposed solution may not work, but there are some problems that could be solved by someone with absolute power pretty easily. For example, if we shipped health insurance CEOs off to El Salvadorian labor camps instead of innocent immigrants, people would stop having their claims denied and the concept of a deductible would go the way of the dodo.

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world -1 points 6 days ago
[–] DoubleDongle@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

Do you think you provide housing? Here's a list of common signs:

If someone stole all your tools, you'd kill them, and you don't think that's weird.

Unhealthy relationship with caffeine (bonus points for other substances too)

At least one fucked-up bone or joint

There's some Liquid Nails or silicone caulk stuck in your favorite work shirt

Your hearing isn't as good as it used to be

Regular porta-shitter use

If two or more of these fit your lifestyle, you may be a provider of housing.

[–] drhodl@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Hey, I just rented my property for exactly what the council rates and body corporate expenses are. A $160 pw home. Not even a mark up to cover repairs etc, because capital gain will more than cover that. I did it because I hate what is happening in housing currently, especially for young buyers. Now my new tenant wants to delay moving in for 3 weeks, and not pay any rent during that time. /sigh....what scum I am....

[–] LengAwaits@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

It is a position not to be controverted that the earth, in its natural uncultivated state was, and ever would have continued to be, the common property of the human race. In that state every man would have been born to property. He would have been a joint life proprietor with the rest in the property of the soil, and in all its natural productions, vegetable and animal. But the earth in its natural state, as before said, is capable of supporting but a small number of inhabitants compared with what it is capable of doing in a cultivated state.

(...)

Cultivation is at least one of the greatest natural improvements ever made by human invention. It has given to created earth a tenfold value. But the landed monopoly that began with it has produced the greatest evil. It has dispossessed more than half the inhabitants of every nation of their natural inheritance, without providing for them, as ought to have been done, an indemnification for that loss, and has thereby created a species of poverty and wretchedness that did not exist before. In advocating the case of the persons thus dispossessed, it is a right, and not a charity, that I am pleading for.

(Full Text PDF)

[–] TommySoda@lemmy.world 92 points 1 week ago

And Airbnb. Fuck that company and the people that buy houses and use them for this. My parents live in the mountains in a popular spot for vacations and camping. Nowadays they are the only house on their entire street that isn't an Airbnb.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 62 points 1 week ago (27 children)

Unused housing should be taxed mercilessly.

And single-family homes should have a 100% annual tax on them, unless they are owned by an individual human/family (none of this LLC bullshit) who own only 1 house. Make a 6-month exception for inherited houses just so they can be sold, but otherwise just tax the shit out of them.

Make hoarding housing a liability.

load more comments (27 replies)
[–] NABDad@lemmy.world 37 points 1 week ago (18 children)

I don't like the idea of US government taking the property at below market value, since that would violate the takings clause of the Constitution.

What I would be in favor of is a real estate tax that increases if a property isn't permanently occupied. Something that would encourage people to either reduce rent or unload the property.

It should be a reasonably gradual increase so that landlords aren't penalized if they can't find a tenant in the first or second month the unit is vacant. However if it's been a year they should be approaching the point of owing more in taxes than the property is worth.

Then you can take it for back taxes.

It would also discourage air b2b type arrangements, unless you own and live in the property. No more buying a house so you can rent it out for exorbitant rates.

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] IDKWhatUsernametoPutHereLolol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 26 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The current federal government? This is about the United States Federal Government?

LOL, nope don't trust them.

They'll seize the houses of "smaller" landlords and give them to the 1% rich landlords, and their houses would be exempt from the regulations. Then they will raise the rent even more, and this time, they will actually have good lawyers, and the tenants will lose every time.

The government needs to be fixed before we can even attempt to fix other issues.

This government would seize housing, then deny access to people of color, LGBT people, people with disabilities (yes the ADA exist, but fascists ignore laws), probably anyone who ever voted registered as a democrat, and anyone else critical of the regime.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] whiskeytango@lemm.ee 23 points 1 week ago (23 children)

As a current landlord about to extend a lease at exactly the same terms for 3rd year in a row (and I fix everything within 24 hours) - I agree with this too.

It's ridiculous that my largest store of value is a speculation bubble and a piece of paper with my name on it

[–] twopi@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Will be in your situation in due time.

Inheritance will give my siblings and I property.

My siblings and I have already talked about it. We're looking to see if we can transfer it to Community Land Trusts or sell.

Here's a link to the Canada wide association: https://www.communityland.ca/

Here's the one specific to Ottawa: https://www.oclt.ca/

There are others in other cities.

Some (like Ottawa) don't take individual units yet but we'll prob sell and then invest in them or if they choose to buy individual units, sell to them.

If you can find one. Sell to a community land trust or housing co-op. You can get your capital back and the people living there can manage and own their own homes.

You can then reinvest the capital into other projects: https://tapestrycapital.ca/

Or in renewable energy: https://www.orec.ca/

Or credit union class B shares.

They try to aim for 4-5% ROI so above inflation. Unfortunately, most people want the ubsustainable returns in real estate.

[–] whiskeytango@lemm.ee 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Ooo! Those are good alternatives. I'll give em a read through. It might solve something on my end.

Say I want to move cities for a new job. There are at least two uncertainties I need to resolve -

  1. will this job work out for the long term?
  2. will I like this city at all (or know where to buy)?

This prevents me from wanting to buy immediately.

What prevents me from selling immediately is losing a stable footing I can plan around if the new city doesn't work out. More broadly for everyone in this situation though is the cash sits.

I will need to buy immediately or park it in some investment that keeps pace/liquid enough to convert back to a house, which requires additional knowledge/research.

So to be risk averse, sitting on the house is generally a safe default...

But thank you for starting me on considering this as an options and what parameters need to be met to make sense.

[–] twopi@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Glad to help.

For now. I'd at least put it in your will and talk to the beneficiaries of your estate about it.

I have family members who are more into the whole Real Estate "game" and would rather the property. Putting it in your will prevent any shenanigans.

The whole "society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they will never know" and all that.

You're right about moving cities part of it. Ideally if there are enough community land trusts and housing cooperatives you won't face such issues as the distinction between "renting" and "owning" will disappear. And your investments will be divorced from land and onto actual projects.

load more comments (22 replies)
[–] But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago (10 children)

I’m a condo super, there’s one apartment in my building that has been vacant for 5+ years and the owners i think live in Hong Kong. If someone busted in there they could squat for years

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›