people will bash blackrock for owning houses but really, what is actually happening here?
governments all around the world have the liberty and possibility to build houses and rent them out to people at-cost. Like, your city can do that. Where do you live? Seattle? Have you considered looking into how many houses the city of seattle has built in the last 20 years? And how many of them it rents out to people for cheap?
You can’t ban corporate houses if there’s no alternative. There needs to be an alternative first, otherwise you’re just creating a vacuum, and as the proverb goes, a vacuum always sucks.
Blackrock isn’t a housing company or developer, it’s an investment group. What’s happening here is that a group that hires a lot of very smart people to manipulate market values has found an easy mark in housing.
The housing shortage is fueled by artificially high prices, not square footage or bedrooms. That’s what you’re missing.
i’m literally advocating for higher housing creation. i specifically stated
governments all around the world have the liberty and possibility to build houses and rent them out to people at-cost. Like, your city can do that. Where do you live? Seattle? Have you considered looking into how many houses the city of seattle has built in the last 20 years? And how many of them it rents out to people for cheap?
Which is as direct a request of municipalities to build social housing as it can be. I don’t get how people interpret that as “corpo dick sucking”?!?
And thats fine, but no city is going to build new social housing; would be communism. The landlords would crucify anyone who tried. Maybe literally.
Gotta use that slick fatty landlord blood to lube up those locks, get people housed. Including corpo landlords. Their very existence implies political oressure.
Your solution (city owned properties) does help solve the issue but it works because it skips the step where a developer builds a property and then it goes to market where we must compete with blackrock to purchase it. It sounds like you are for cutting institutions out of the equation and agree they are a problem so I’m a bit confused. Banning companies like blackrock from competing with residents would similarly help.
this whole thing just doesn’t add up in my head.
people will bash blackrock for owning houses but really, what is actually happening here?
governments all around the world have the liberty and possibility to build houses and rent them out to people at-cost. Like, your city can do that. Where do you live? Seattle? Have you considered looking into how many houses the city of seattle has built in the last 20 years? And how many of them it rents out to people for cheap?
You can’t ban corporate houses if there’s no alternative. There needs to be an alternative first, otherwise you’re just creating a vacuum, and as the proverb goes, a vacuum always sucks.
Blackrock isn’t a housing company or developer, it’s an investment group. What’s happening here is that a group that hires a lot of very smart people to manipulate market values has found an easy mark in housing.
The housing shortage is fueled by artificially high prices, not square footage or bedrooms. That’s what you’re missing.
But mainly fuelled by lack of supply increasing demand and therefore price
so what you’re saying is that market manipulation (= monopolies) is the problem, not companies owning houses?
I’m saying that companies owning houses is the market manipulation, neighbor.
How do you type so much while deep throating corpo dick? Do you just have absolutely no gag reflex? How does one learn this skill?
You realize ownership isnt creation, right? I genuinely have to ask here.
i’m literally advocating for higher housing creation. i specifically stated
Which is as direct a request of municipalities to build social housing as it can be. I don’t get how people interpret that as “corpo dick sucking”?!?
And thats fine, but no city is going to build new social housing; would be communism. The landlords would crucify anyone who tried. Maybe literally.
Gotta use that slick fatty landlord blood to lube up those locks, get people housed. Including corpo landlords. Their very existence implies political oressure.
Your solution (city owned properties) does help solve the issue but it works because it skips the step where a developer builds a property and then it goes to market where we must compete with blackrock to purchase it. It sounds like you are for cutting institutions out of the equation and agree they are a problem so I’m a bit confused. Banning companies like blackrock from competing with residents would similarly help.