7 ms·
The difference: nothing really. It's just that society appears to be able to hold on for a while with dysfunctional banks, while if no one wants to work again b
by agent327 5y ago
The difference: nothing really. It's just that society appears to be able to hold on for a while with dysfunctional banks, while if no one wants to work again because money flows in through credit cards anyway, it seems to me things would go awry pretty damn quickly.
If you want to truly change the housing market, require that the owner of the house lives in that house full time as well. Under this scheme families can own one house, and companies cannot own houses at all. There wouldn't be any rent-seeking at all.
As for private colleges, they are not a necessity, so let them do as they please. Just, maybe, print mandatory yearly statistics about how their graduates are actually doing - that's enough information to tell people whether it's worth enrolling or not.
- thombat 5y agoSo when I move cities I have to quickly sell my house, or let it stand empty (or maybe let people live rent-free to avoid squatters)? Feels like quite a barrier to employment mobility
- bluecalm 5y agoLet them do as they please as long as you don't hand out government guaranteed loans used to pay them. Colleges should have skin in the game - your graduates can't find decent paying job? - you are on the hook for the loan not the government. The incentives are just not right.
- agent327 5y agoThat I can agree with.
- SamoyedFurFluff 5y agoWhat happens to people who didn’t graduate college but still had loans taken out for it?
- boppo1 5y agoTake them behind the shed
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]