7 ms·

They are a communist subreddit so I’d probably get banned from saying this there: In communism the one organization will own all homes, not just 30k of them. So

by sfe22 5y ago

They are a communist subreddit so I’d probably get banned from saying this there: In communism the one organization will own all homes, not just 30k of them. So if 30k is bad, how is owning everything better? This post is actually contradicting all they believe in.

genocidicbunny 5y ago
You really can't see any difference between a government (tenuously beholden to its citizens) and a corporation (beholden to no one but the shareholders, if that) owning property? Can I interest you in some new eyeglasses? You seem to be in need.
- unmole 5y ago
  Can I interest you in a book? https://ctheory.sitehost.iu.edu/img/Hayek_The_Road_to_Serfdom.pdf https://ctheory.sitehost.iu.edu/img/Hayek_The_Road_to_Serfdo...
  - genocidicbunny 5y ago
    Sorry, the digital copy of this is rather hard to wipe my ass with unlike the paper copy. In that sense, I'd rather have a paper copy, it's more useful.
- sfe22 5y ago
  This company is also beholden to its customers, they have to compete with other companies and individuals and can only profit if they are really good at what they do. If it is extremely profitable many others will jump on the opportunity, thus lowering prices. What incentive would a government granted monopoly have to improve? And no, a government is almost never beholden to it’s people. It automatically has power, especially communist ones. The “democratic” one also only have to convince a few groups to agree on a few topics to get full controll.
  - genocidicbunny 5y ago
    > This company is also beholden to its customers, they have to compete with other companies and individuals and can only profit if they are really good at what they do. If it is extremely profitable many others will jump on the opportunity, thus lowering prices. Will the companies compete to lower their prices to their cost level? That is, to have 0% profit by default? I don't think so. But housing should absolutely bear 0% profit by default. Governments can subsidize housing to below cost (allowing some profit to be made) but the default should always be selling the housing at-cost. The ability to make a profit from this is the crux of the problem. That introduces all sorts of negatives into the equation. > And no, a government is almost never beholden to it’s people. Maybe not, but it is more beholden to its people than a corporation is. A corporation doesn't even have 'its people'.
    - sfe22 5y ago
      Why is someone being more efficient than alternative and making a profit a bad thing? Besides you are free to create a non profit housing company, if you truly believe in what you preach. And you will have an edge with prospective customers. Why advocate for one big monopoly unless you have a potentially malicious agenda?
      - genocidicbunny 5y ago
        What exactly are they being efficient in? Are they raising the supply of housing while lowering prices on it to at-cost or below?
        sfe22 5y ago
        In a free market an entity has to be efficient to survive and especially make a profit. There are plenty of ways they can do it, creating more housing, better conditions, extras etc. and other things potential customers may value and choose them. Care to reply to this: > Why advocate for one big monopoly unless you have a potentially malicious agenda? And why you won’t create a non-profit company if you actually believe in what you preach?

by sfe22 5y ago

genocidicbunny 5y ago

You really can't see any difference between a government (tenuously beholden to its citizens) and a corporation (beholden to no one but the shareholders, if that) owning property? Can I interest you in some new eyeglasses? You seem to be in need.

unmole 5y ago
Can I interest you in a book? https://ctheory.sitehost.iu.edu/img/Hayek_The_Road_to_Serfdom.pdf https://ctheory.sitehost.iu.edu/img/Hayek_The_Road_to_Serfdo...
- genocidicbunny 5y ago
  Sorry, the digital copy of this is rather hard to wipe my ass with unlike the paper copy. In that sense, I'd rather have a paper copy, it's more useful.
sfe22 5y ago
This company is also beholden to its customers, they have to compete with other companies and individuals and can only profit if they are really good at what they do. If it is extremely profitable many others will jump on the opportunity, thus lowering prices. What incentive would a government granted monopoly have to improve? And no, a government is almost never beholden to it’s people. It automatically has power, especially communist ones. The “democratic” one also only have to convince a few groups to agree on a few topics to get full controll.
- genocidicbunny 5y ago
  > This company is also beholden to its customers, they have to compete with other companies and individuals and can only profit if they are really good at what they do. If it is extremely profitable many others will jump on the opportunity, thus lowering prices. Will the companies compete to lower their prices to their cost level? That is, to have 0% profit by default? I don't think so. But housing should absolutely bear 0% profit by default. Governments can subsidize housing to below cost (allowing some profit to be made) but the default should always be selling the housing at-cost. The ability to make a profit from this is the crux of the problem. That introduces all sorts of negatives into the equation. > And no, a government is almost never beholden to it’s people. Maybe not, but it is more beholden to its people than a corporation is. A corporation doesn't even have 'its people'.
  - sfe22 5y ago
    Why is someone being more efficient than alternative and making a profit a bad thing? Besides you are free to create a non profit housing company, if you truly believe in what you preach. And you will have an edge with prospective customers. Why advocate for one big monopoly unless you have a potentially malicious agenda?
    - genocidicbunny 5y ago
      What exactly are they being efficient in? Are they raising the supply of housing while lowering prices on it to at-cost or below?
      - sfe22 5y ago
        In a free market an entity has to be efficient to survive and especially make a profit. There are plenty of ways they can do it, creating more housing, better conditions, extras etc. and other things potential customers may value and choose them. Care to reply to this: > Why advocate for one big monopoly unless you have a potentially malicious agenda? And why you won’t create a non-profit company if you actually believe in what you preach?