Let’s translate yours: “I cannot conceive of a social housing system similar to that of social healthcare, in which people are guaranteed housing at affordable prices by law”
Even if you misinterpret the argument that way, social housing could be provided for free at the point of use, with no rent to be paid. The main distinction is whether the housing is owned and controlled by private or public entities; the former will necessarily demand a profit to be made, the latter can operate at net zero spending or even “at a loss” by spending taxpayer funds as a social service.
That’s not a misinterpretation. This wasn’t a call where rent limits are set by a locations minimum wage.
This was the abolition of rent.
Which does go along with the elimination of ownership. If all housing was state owned that would eliminate the potential for price gouging and allow for the distribution of housing based on pure need. An empty space + a person = housing
Not many people are calling for the end of homeownership.
The problem is that in your original comment, you are presenting a false trichotomy: people need to pay rent, or own a house, or be homeless. There is indeed a fourth option of providing social housing, free at the point of use.
Not many people are calling for the end of homeownership.
It depends on what precisely is meant by “ownership”, but maybe I am.
Personally I’m in favor of some modified version of the chinese system where almost everyone “owns” a home, but their children can’t inherit it. I think technically the state owns all the housing, and provides people with a cheap/free lifetime lease of some kind. There should also be a limit on how many properties a single person can own, and renting those places out should be banned.
And then as a compliment there should also be some excess state-owned social housing. There are edge-cases where for one reason or another you can’t/don’t want to own.
So yeah in general I think we need to abolish the concept of homeownership as it exists in the west.
I have relatives with multiple properties in China and they certainly own it as much as their multiple properties in the US. Owning multiple properties in both they feel quite positive about BOTH systems working as intended.
Maybe someday they will be in for a rude awakening but i have no reason to disbelieve them currently.
Lets translate that
“If you can not buy a house in cash, you should live with your parents or be unhoused.”
Let’s translate yours: “I cannot conceive of a social housing system similar to that of social healthcare, in which people are guaranteed housing at affordable prices by law”
Umm this is against rent at all. As in ANY rent. So an affordable price is still against this statement.
This wasn’t “some rent is theft”
Even if you misinterpret the argument that way, social housing could be provided for free at the point of use, with no rent to be paid. The main distinction is whether the housing is owned and controlled by private or public entities; the former will necessarily demand a profit to be made, the latter can operate at net zero spending or even “at a loss” by spending taxpayer funds as a social service.
That’s not a misinterpretation. This wasn’t a call where rent limits are set by a locations minimum wage.
This was the abolition of rent.
Which does go along with the elimination of ownership. If all housing was state owned that would eliminate the potential for price gouging and allow for the distribution of housing based on pure need. An empty space + a person = housing
Not many people are calling for the end of homeownership.
The problem is that in your original comment, you are presenting a false trichotomy: people need to pay rent, or own a house, or be homeless. There is indeed a fourth option of providing social housing, free at the point of use.
It depends on what precisely is meant by “ownership”, but maybe I am.
Personally I’m in favor of some modified version of the chinese system where almost everyone “owns” a home, but their children can’t inherit it. I think technically the state owns all the housing, and provides people with a cheap/free lifetime lease of some kind. There should also be a limit on how many properties a single person can own, and renting those places out should be banned.
And then as a compliment there should also be some excess state-owned social housing. There are edge-cases where for one reason or another you can’t/don’t want to own.
So yeah in general I think we need to abolish the concept of homeownership as it exists in the west.
I have relatives with multiple properties in China and they certainly own it as much as their multiple properties in the US. Owning multiple properties in both they feel quite positive about BOTH systems working as intended.
Maybe someday they will be in for a rude awakening but i have no reason to disbelieve them currently.
The post: “rent is a tax that poor people pay TO RICH PEOPLE[…]”. The problem is obviously private landlordism, not social housing in the form of rent
I thought that they were simply reclassifying anyone who owned property as rich.
I have seen that argument made in good faith.