3 ms·
> Let's say I agree with this idea and let's also ignore the fact that by stating it's a right, we are implicitly stating that someone else needs to pay for it
by TelmoMenezes 8y ago
> Let's say I agree with this idea and let's also ignore the fact that by stating it's a right, we are implicitly stating that someone else needs to pay for it with their own money if you cannot.
Yup, we do that sort of thing all the time in Europe. I know zero people that went bankrupt because of an unexpected serious illness and I know zero people that dislike the idea that we should all pool our resources so that universal health care is possible. This also applies to education, unemployment and other things. And yes, housing.
In fact, most of the western world is more similar to Europe than to the US in this regard. Surprisingly, people from the US speak as if social-democracy is impossible somehow... It is not perfect for sure, but many aspects of modern US sound like a a dystopia to me.
> If housing is a right, does that necessarily mean that housing in a specific area is a right?
Agreed, but it should be possible to have renting contracts that do not make you move out of the place you have lived for half a century because some rich kids arrive with macbook pros and a taste for overpriced bad coffee. In fact, this is the case in Berlin, which of course means that some landlords start playing dirty tricks.
I am for freedom. I think that people should, as much as possible, live as they wish. If you and your friends want to build Galt's Gulch, more power to you. If Berliners want to stay away from those games, more power to us.
- berlinerluft 8y agoI am a renter in Berlin, so it is in my temporary interest if rents are limited (not talking about side effects, just in terms of short term thinking). But honestly, if you want to live in the same place for 30 years, maybe you should consider buying it? If somebody offers my landlord double the price I am paying, why exactly should he be liable to keep me as a renter?