Spicy's plan for utopia

[thetruepandagod]

curious how let's say purchasing land in a rural nowhere of maine or montana and building a personal home with several guest houses you could rent out in theory would work in this hypothetical landlord abolition system. at what point would i be stopped? buying the land in the middle of nowhere? building the facilities? or accepting people who desire to pay to live in the buildings?

[Spicyryan]

curious how let's say purchasing land in a rural nowhere of maine or montana and building a personal home with several guest houses you could rent out in theory would work in this hypothetical landlord abolition system. at what point would i be stopped? buying the land in the middle of nowhere? building the facilities? or accepting people who desire to pay to live in the buildings?

The point at which you attempt to rent it for that sweet myth of "passive income".

[NynJa]

And whats wrong with that? They're providing a service which costs money.

[thetruepandagod]

who will stop me and why? if it is agreeable between both parties? what if i am found out to have been allowing people to rent these properties? will they be forcibly evicted to proper government housing?

[Spicyryan]

And whats wrong with that? They're providing a service which costs money.

I figured the couple paragraphs I said on it sort of answered that.

who will stop me and why? if it is agreeable between both parties? what if i am found out to have been allowing people to rent these properties? will they be forcibly evicted to proper government housing?

I figured we could just give IRS agents cattle prods and automatic shotguns for house calls. What do you mean why? Yah did a no-no.

It be unlikely that you would have people to kick out in this case as housing is viewed as a right so people have it and don't need to resort to renting out your hot attic. It be more likely you were renting Air B&B style, and get fined or worse.

[NynJa]

If housing is viewed as a right, and I cant be removed from my housing, why would I spend my money on my house when I can spend my money on a new 4090 and ps5?

[Roranora]

If housing is viewed as a right, and I cant be removed from my housing, why would I spend my money on my house when I can spend my money on a new 4090 and ps5?

because you don't live in the dorms after freshman year

[thetruepandagod]

It be unlikely that you would have people to kick out in this case as housing is viewed as a right so people have it and don't need to resort to renting out your hot attic. It be more likely you were renting Air B&B style, and get fined or worse.

in your government housing scenario they will be having adequate housing in all areas? even areas with no work where it is not particularly beneficial to house people? and at what point in your mind does something go from air b&b style renting to just regular ol renting? are you saying that there will be housing in every location across the country that is satisfactory to everyone's needs enough so that there would truly be 0 reason for anyone to seek to rent out something in an isolated location even if for nothing more than a bit of escapism? and i did say guest houses fella, keep ur sweaty attic commie jabs away

would housing be a right with stipulations? what stipulations? what sizes, what amenities, how much free space, how much choice on location in relation to city centers or open nature? how much say do communities have in it? how much can you adjust and change your house that isn't actually your house? what happens if you want to move to a different more popular location? do there become long wait times as housing is built up in popular locations or are people somewhat controlled and dispersed for better ease of housing?

[kuronosan]

Should have called this thread Blue Collar Comedy Tour.

[archibaldcrane]

You have a democratic state of the people compared to an individual whose goal is to profit at the expense of others. Then use that profit to influence the law and insulate themselves.
Your odds are better with the state in this case.

A quarter of the public housing units in DC are unfilled due to gross mismanagement. It costs a million dollars per unit to build supportive housing in San Francisco. Government run housing failures in many areas are the norm, not the exception. I'm supportive of the concept but particularly wary of the execution, especially since in our federalist system these would be state-operated, and we know full well that Republican-run states would rather do anything else other than actually use public assistance funds for their intended purpose.

Landlords (as a class, not me, I'm a great landlord and my tenants love me) are as abusive as supply constraints allow them to be, and cities across the country continue to drastically restrict housing supply with zoning, giving landlords immense and unwarranted power over their tenants.

[Spicyryan]

in your government housing scenario they will be having adequate housing in all areas? even areas with no work where it is not particularly beneficial to house people? and at what point in your mind does something go from air b&b style renting to just regular ol renting? are you saying that there will be housing in every location across the country that is satisfactory to everyone's needs enough so that there would truly be 0 reason for anyone to seek to rent out something in an isolated location even if for nothing more than a bit of escapism? and i did say guest houses fella, keep ur sweaty attic commie jabs away

would housing be a right with stipulations? what stipulations? what sizes, what amenities, how much free space, how much choice on location in relation to city centers or open nature? how much say do communities have in it? how much can you adjust and change your house that isn't actually your house? what happens if you want to move to a different more popular location? do there become long wait times as housing is built up in popular locations or are people somewhat controlled and dispersed for better ease of housing?

It doesn't matter if its Air B&B or not, no landlords means no renting. As for building, you wouldn't build more housing where it isn't needed. I don't think "What if I have a lone cabin in the middle of nowhere, is that okay?!" Is an important point of contention. Sweaty attic jabs are a fair because that's how plenty of people end up living when housing is a profit motive. Far more people than there are "escapists".

Housing isn't really free in the same way that healthcare isn't free. Taxes finance it. People work. Work generates outputs. Outputs support society. Housing is part of society just like roads or hospitals or gas station sushi.

Why has "what do you want?" become not only a thread, but the entire planning of an economy? Worrying about the square footage and amenities is a bit much. The planning of housing or land usage in a city or town is done by a body just as it is now. Except there is greater element of community involvement and planning involved in this case. Land usage would focus more on need rather than profit for the sake of profit. Getting into how many coffee shops will be in a X mile radius is missing the point.

[Drai]

realistically the only way any of this works is if we abolish the concept of money and everything becomes free, everyone is only allowed one residence, period, and to keep it fair all families of a certain size get the exact same house. This would also require a cap on the number of children a family is allowed to have so we don't run into a situation where people have a ton of kids so they can be allotted a mansion instead of a standard size house. All land would be owned by the government and the concept of ownership itself would need to be removed, else you end up with people who have inherited land trying to build illegal residences for themselves.

[synistar]

Seriously just watch the most recent episode of Rick and Morty.

[Andalusian girls]

i would sooner allow a Russian hegemony

[Zealot]

There's another way in which a benevolent ultra-capitist simply buys enough of the world that they can bend it to their will.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

[archibaldcrane]

The planning of housing or land usage in a city or town is done by a body just as it is now. Except there is greater element of community involvement and planning involved in this case.

Nightmare.

Let me translate what "community involvement" means in practice - the loudest retiree busybodies doing everything they can to make their desires to keep poor, brown, young people out of their communities by any means necessary.

Urban planning needs far less "community involvement".

[Tymon]

[Tymon]

realistically the only way any of this works is if we abolish the concept of money and everything becomes free, everyone is only allowed one residence, period, and to keep it fair all families of a certain size get the exact same house. This would also require a cap on the number of children a family is allowed to have so we don't run into a situation where people have a ton of kids so they can be allotted a mansion instead of a standard size house. All land would be owned by the government and the concept of ownership itself would need to be removed, else you end up with people who have inherited land trying to build illegal residences for themselves.

Exactly, and this is why this is a utopian fever dream. No single country can do this, period. It would require globalism on an unprecedented scale. Literal new world order stuff.

[Uzor]

I don’t think completely free housing for everyone would every work. And I don’t think free housing in specific areas is the way to go either, that causes segregation which is a huge issue in a lot of countries, including Sweden.

I like what my landlord does, though. 10-20% of all units in every building is reserved for those that require housing assistance. Could be immigrants, women fleeing violence, etc. So rather than placing everyone that require assistance in the same area and causing segregation, they’re spread out. That means that the housing provided is of a good quality and maintained, in alright neighborhoods.

[Gredival]

Exactly, and this is why this is a utopian fever dream. No single country can do this, period. It would require globalism on an unprecedented scale. Literal new world order stuff.

We can do it if we just believe hard enough and open our minds. Neoliberalism's true power is closing our imaginations.