110
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2024
110 points (95.8% liked)
Asklemmy
43451 readers
1087 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm staying in a city temporarily for about 6 months, whers would I live if I couldn't rent?
The lack of a land lord does not mean the house disappeared off the planet.
Yes but I'm not going to buy a house for 6 months just to sell it, it's not very feasible.
The lack of a landlord also does not prevent you from temporarily using open housing either.
Wdym?
Imagine a world where housing was given on a per-need basis. People still need to travel for work and stay for months at a time, except it's understood that the job getting done is more important than a landlord profiting off the fact you have to travel for it.
Who maintains such supply of houses, who pays for it, who would own it, who would carry out repair works as and when they are needed.
Landlords do not build housing, nor do they do repair work. So I'm gonna say the scarry trigger word for all you libertarians out there to gasp at. Gubberment.
Hotels used to be the standard temporary housing.