View Single Post
  #6  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2021, 8:59 PM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicago river View Post
Allowing one person to own another person's home is a terrible idea and has zero positive effects on society as a whole. Landlords are leeches. Even the godfather of capitalism, Adam Smith, agrees.
Except that real estate is a valuable asset and landowners are probably the second oldest profession after prostitutes.

If you don’t have a concept of renting or otherwise paying to occupy a dwelling owned by another person, then what do people with no assets do? Build a lean-to?

The real problem is anything that keeps supply from matching demand. Otherwise buildings have a replacement cost, based on materials and labor, which should increase over time but in line with general inflation, rather than vastly outpacing it.

Some of these things are worthwhile, like historic preservation to retain cultural patrimony and aesthetics. But there’s a lot of stuff - ranging from regulations to graft - that impede supply. Think about those things.
__________________
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov
Reply With Quote