• gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    Because there is nothing immoral or unethical about having multiple rental property.

    You’re charging someone for you doing nothing so they can have a basic need to survive. It’s very immoral

    If you’re gonna try to defend an immoral act with

    Or is this just bandwagon hate on a common and ancient business practice?

    Then Ill assume you’re pro-slavery and move on

    • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      15 hours ago

      You’re charging someone for you doing nothing

      Go talk to someone who manages a rental, ask them specifically what they do. What do they do when the tenant leaves? What do they do when the tenant doesn’t pay? What do they do when things break? What do they do when there is a squatter? What do they do when there is a bogus complaint to the local government? What do they do when a unit sits empty for an extended period?

      The answer to all those questions is most certainly not ‘nothing’.

    • mechoman444@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Charging for housing isn’t immoral just because it’s a necessity. By that logic, grocery stores are immoral for charging for food, and doctors are immoral for charging for healthcare. Property ownership and rental markets exist because providing and maintaining housing costs money. If your argument is that the system should be reformed, fine, let’s talk solutions. But calling all landlords inherently immoral is just lazy thinking.

      Also your comment on slavery is offensive which I believe is the only reason you added it which makes you sound even more stupid.

      • Echofox@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        Food and housing should be covered as part of basic income. We absolutely have the global production for it. The implementation is all but blocked because of earth-legacy, so I’m not saying it’s practical with today’s society. It would take extreme global change.

        People make comments like “then why would anybody work” but that doesn’t take into account how damn efficient our farming and production is. We’re on the cusp of extreme automation and the actual number of workers required is very low. People would still work to own better homes, better food, better cars, better electronics, more access to travel, etc.

        Don’t get me wrong, I’m not sure how to get there form here, but there’s nothing technical preventing it - only sociological. Which is a bigger hurdle in my opinion. Technology is easy. People are not.

      • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        Also your comment on slavery is offensive

        So you know your argument works perfectly for slavery, can see how it applies and are embarrassed enough being called out on it to be offended, but not to rethink yourself? That response is actually why I included it: easy way to tell you’re not to be taken seriously

        • mechoman444@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          Oh, please. Get off your intellectual high horse. Your ability to string coherent words together doesn’t mean you actually know anything. All you’ve done is throw out a false equivalency and some hyperbole. I present arguments, and you respond with pseudo-intellectual gibberish. The people who take you seriously are the same ones who fart into wine glasses, idiots. I’m so tired of you hipster fucks on Lemmy. You talk about things you don’t understand and convince yourselves you’re enlightened. You’re just short-sighted trash wrapped in $100 words and YouTube rhetoric.

          • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            All you’ve done is throw out a false equivalency and some hyperbole

            No, I pointed out that your main argument in your original comment was terrible as it was an equally valid defense for slavery, figuring that if you got butthurt at being called out on it that you weren’t worth engaging mentally with, as anyone of any decency would see that and go “oh fuck dude maybe I should rethink at least that part of my stance”, it’s literally what I said in my comment ffs

            you respond with pseudo-intellectual gibberish

            My point, non-intellectual as it may be (like basically everything I do), wasn’t gibberish to anyone with basic reading comprehension