this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2024
164 points (100.0% liked)
the_dunk_tank
15681 readers
225 users here now
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this.
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Calling it now: local governments are gonna start banning multi-family dwellings for bs safety reasons (read: to squeeze even more rent out of the working class). Gotta make all those lazy, good-for-nothing young people pay our hard-working, downtrodden landlords! Then congress will pass a bill with some inane title like, Safe Housing for Seniors to make it so that kids over 18 are legally required to move out and either find an apartment (lol good luck on that), join the military or go to prison.
A less extreme version of what you said already happened across a lot of North America decades ago, and we're living with the consequences. In most cities, it's illegal to build anything other than detached houses on most of the land. There's an empty lot near me that's been undeveloped for a decade because the previous house burned down and the finances of building another detached house there didn't work out for the guy who owned it, but the city wouldn't let him build a duplex with the same footprint because it was "too dense for the character of the neighbourhood."
Get involved in your local government. Tell your city council to stop living at the whims of landlords and to start legalising housing.
Jesus, thatβs infuriating. I really hope some petty rich guy builds that type of home anyway and hires lawyers to handle the resulting lawsuits until all the awful landlords and their allies are insolvent.
Not likely to happen, because those zoning codes are generally on a solid legal footing.
In my own city we're slowly starting to make progress, but it's taking a long time. Minneapolis is one of the places that's doing really well on this front.
In the socdem hell that is Finland this has been built to the states systems for a long time. We can get housing benefits as poors, but those will get cut based on family relations. A poor kid can't move in the same house with a parent no matter what age without these benefits being cut.
Students living at home also are punished for living at home by cutting student benefits, regardless of age and how poor the household is.
Every direction you look there are systems upon systems that maximize the carseral nature of poverty and poverty working as a trap. Including a tax on how much money one can gift to other people. And the poor who have to file for basic income need to present their bank statements and if a relative has helped them with more than 50β¬/month that then gets deducted from the minimal living standard basic income they would get. Same as all side hustle money or tax return or other. So you will never have more than the lowest basic minimum a month no matter what you do. And even this can be cut if you refuse things like work rehab. The minimum basic income here is so low it has been flagged three years in a row by a human rights watch.
The other end of the spectum gets tax cuts for second houses for work, endless support to stay rich.
It's extremely efficiently built and multilayered and the best part is the state is able to frame it as good welfare. It's not, it's a maintenance of a slavery class, which many unemployed are. With 9β¬/day, it's just called "work rehab".
I'm not entirely opposed to capping gifting, it's one of the ways the rich get around inheritance laws and such.
Over here, your welfare is dependent on your partner not earning too much. So, for disabled people you're at much higher risk of abuse being trapped in a relationship, have lower independence, and anyone entering a relationship with you has to take on a financial burden.
Yup same here on that too. Also spouses income impacts your rights. So a lot of domestic abuse or exploitation gets hidden when people (often women) have no personal income and are at home with a spouse who earns so much they don't qualify for the basic income to even theoretically fund getting away, not that it would be enough for that.