How is it taking a cut? And that last sentence also makes no sense; if you remove the landlord from the equation, the house they owned, is now NOT owned, by anyone. The would-be renter can’t afford to buy it themself, so now they have nowhere to live.
Okay so you have a building with ten apartments in it. The landlords are all killed, o happy day
Do you think those people are homeless now?
I’m talking about if the landlords NEVER existed, not if they were magically erased from existence, WHILE people are renting from them (in which case ‘just give them that house for free lol’ is still a horrendous suggestion. To suggest with a straight face to kill homeowners and take what they owned is absolutely abhorrent. Literally murderous envy, disgusting).
The landlord never existed, meaning that home was never bought by them. None of those would-be renters can afford to buy the house, either. So yes, they are homeless now.
Removing renting means that your only real option for long-term shelter is to buy a house. Which means, obviously, that everyone who cannot afford to buy a house, will have nowhere to live.
If a building is vacant and unowned, somebody can just fucking live there.
lmao, how is it that a building is ever unowned, exactly? When it’s built, the one who paid to build it owns it. So how does it become ownerless?
Oh, right, your plan is to murder the owner and take it afterward. Are you offering yourself up in the same way? Shall anyone who’d like to, kill you and be entitled to all you used to possess?
What kind of insane hyper-libertarian world are you fantasizing about, you lunatic?
Oh honey you can’t even understand what I’m saying. Od say have a nice life, but youre obviously a landlord, and I’d probably rather you didn’t. Repent, I guess?
Aww, did the Big Bad Facts get in the way of your narrative? So you had to try and save face with smug evasion? Who do you think you’re fooling with this ridiculous charade?
It’s really pitiful just how little reality it takes to make ideologues’ impotent narrative crumble so miserably.
How is it taking a cut? And that last sentence also makes no sense; if you remove the landlord from the equation, the house they owned, is now NOT owned, by anyone. The would-be renter can’t afford to buy it themself, so now they have nowhere to live.
Okay so you have a building with ten apartments in it. The landlords are all killed, o happy day
Do you think those people are homeless now?
What do they do when the old lady in #10 dies?
Do you think they just leave it fucking empty?
What do you think they do when the roof needs replacing?
Do you think they just let it rot?
The landlord provides nothing. If a building is vacant and unowned, somebody can just fucking live there.
I’m talking about if the landlords NEVER existed, not if they were magically erased from existence, WHILE people are renting from them (in which case ‘just give them that house for free lol’ is still a horrendous suggestion. To suggest with a straight face to kill homeowners and take what they owned is absolutely abhorrent. Literally murderous envy, disgusting).
The landlord never existed, meaning that home was never bought by them. None of those would-be renters can afford to buy the house, either. So yes, they are homeless now.
Removing renting means that your only real option for long-term shelter is to buy a house. Which means, obviously, that everyone who cannot afford to buy a house, will have nowhere to live.
lmao, how is it that a building is ever unowned, exactly? When it’s built, the one who paid to build it owns it. So how does it become ownerless?
Oh, right, your plan is to murder the owner and take it afterward. Are you offering yourself up in the same way? Shall anyone who’d like to, kill you and be entitled to all you used to possess?
What kind of insane hyper-libertarian world are you fantasizing about, you lunatic?
Oh honey you can’t even understand what I’m saying. Od say have a nice life, but youre obviously a landlord, and I’d probably rather you didn’t. Repent, I guess?
Aww, did the Big Bad Facts get in the way of your narrative? So you had to try and save face with smug evasion? Who do you think you’re fooling with this ridiculous charade?
It’s really pitiful just how little reality it takes to make ideologues’ impotent narrative crumble so miserably.