Well what's to stop a person from getting a donated home from reselling it? If the average person gets an apartment unit for free and then gets an offer to sell it to Blackrock for 6-7 figures? add in the eventualities of people needing to move or just having changes in their life. The system reasserts itself, people will be induced into becoming kulaks. Holland's idea isn't that bad, considering that I'll never see municipal housing being put into place by the government, or a tenant's rights initiative to put caps on what a landlord can extract in rent from a unit of housing.
I've been in situations where I could have benefitted from a benevolent landlord, and thus can relate to the impulse to occupy that position to benefit others as opposed to someone else who'd be seduced by the profit motive. I've also come to understand that the real solution is to eliminate the position of vulnerability altogether; Tom's probably not radicalized yet. you see this with liberal celebrities sometimes. The misguided attempts to be a good capitalist, like Jeffrey Wright and his African gold mine.
You see, that would be unfair because then some up-and-coming entrepreneurial landlord would miss out on an opportunity to prove themselves in the Free™ Market™. It's better if the housing is owned by people who actually know what to do with it.
If you don’t need the money then why even buy housing in the first place to own it? Why not just buy it up and donate it to people?
Well what's to stop a person from getting a donated home from reselling it? If the average person gets an apartment unit for free and then gets an offer to sell it to Blackrock for 6-7 figures? add in the eventualities of people needing to move or just having changes in their life. The system reasserts itself, people will be induced into becoming kulaks. Holland's idea isn't that bad, considering that I'll never see municipal housing being put into place by the government, or a tenant's rights initiative to put caps on what a landlord can extract in rent from a unit of housing.
I've been in situations where I could have benefitted from a benevolent landlord, and thus can relate to the impulse to occupy that position to benefit others as opposed to someone else who'd be seduced by the profit motive. I've also come to understand that the real solution is to eliminate the position of vulnerability altogether; Tom's probably not radicalized yet. you see this with liberal celebrities sometimes. The misguided attempts to be a good capitalist, like Jeffrey Wright and his African gold mine.
Oh you mean the guy future generations will recognize as James Baldwin? :Baldwin-weeping:
You see, that would be unfair because then some up-and-coming entrepreneurial landlord would miss out on an opportunity to prove themselves in the Free™ Market™. It's better if the housing is owned by people who actually know what to do with it.