this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2024
53 points (83.5% liked)

politics

18870 readers
3899 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Sundial@lemm.ee 40 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Her secret weapon is addressing that generations top concerns?

[–] sensiblepuffin@lemmy.world 41 points 1 week ago (2 children)

To be fair, it's been ignored for so long it might as well be a secret weapon.

[–] baronvonj@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

it's been ignored for so long

Laughing in Gen X

[–] sensiblepuffin@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If you don't laugh, you'll cry :)

[–] baronvonj@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Just drown my sorrows in the garden hose until I can come back inside.

[–] Sundial@lemm.ee 17 points 1 week ago

I don't like how correct you are.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 38 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Reading the first paragraph gives the answer. But, if you don't want to do that, it's affordable housing.

Guessed by the thumbnail. Was not steered wrong.

[–] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago

I love Vance’s stupid argument that undocumented people are taking your homes.

The population growth rate is declining in the US and will be plateauing. Also, Vance wants people to have way more kids and accelerate the population growth rate.

I swear, these weirdos play mad libs and just out “illegal immigrants” into every blank space.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's an absolutely dumb idea, though. It won't solve a single thing.

The real fix would upset the rich. No person, entity, or affiliated entity should be allowed to own more than like 5 homes.

That's literally all it would take to solve the issue. 60% all all rental houses are owned by corpos. Some own over 50,000 houses they collect rent on. That's just absolute bullshit that shouldn't exist. Owning houses shouldn't be a 7+ figure income strategy

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

There’s a simpler solution: no non-individual entity can own a residential property - house, condo, apartment, whatever. The exception, of course, being banks, in the interest of mortgages, but that’s rather different anyways - the bank is essentially holding ownership of the property in escrow until the loan is paid back. That one rule would go SO FAR in controlling the price of housing. Yes, scarcity is part of the issue, but blatant corporate profiteering and forever-renting is an insidious and horrifying threat that fucking NOBODY who makes policy talks about, because if they did the lobbyists would bury them.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Worded like that, an individual can own 1,000 houses.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

There would of course be ramping taxes for owning multiple residences, up to 100% once you get past a vacation home or two, but you must know that that’s nowhere even close to being the primary driver of the housing crisis.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 week ago

If course companies and people owning multiple homes is the driving factor. That's the only reason it isn't a buyers market and housing costs have literally over doubled in the past 15 years. Everything has been bought up to be used as rentals or air BNB's.

[–] ashok36@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And Trump has his secret weapon: lying out of his ass with no fact checking. Guess which one will win.

[–] trslim@pawb.social 5 points 1 week ago

And my parents believe all his bullshit and cast doubt on anything that contradicts them.

[–] MCasq_qsaCJ_234@lemmy.zip 9 points 1 week ago

In short, more housing must be built.

[–] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Deflating housing prices when boomers are trying to retire is a good way to lose 2028 though...

[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

F BOOMERS! They've taken enough already

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Honestly, fuck 'em... They're rapidly declining as a voting block and if they sold the houses they bought in the 80s at 2008 prices they'd still make a fucking killing.

[–] Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 1 week ago

In general, the boomers with houses are also the boomers with pensions.

And we can't afford their houses right now anyway.

[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

Is it 5G and mRNA vaccines?

Or is it Jewish space lasers?