3 ms·
Please let's explore this a little. How do you feel about a person that builds a house with their own hands and then rents it out for the next 50 years? I pers
by supportlocal4h 4y ago
Please let's explore this a little. How do you feel about a person that builds a house with their own hands and then rents it out for the next 50 years?
I personally am ok with that.
What if they rent it out to the same tenant for 50 years? I am ok with that but start to question the wisdom of the tenant. What if rent keeps going up even beyond a reasonable mortgage payment? It doesn't make me question the landlord more. It makes me question the tenant more.
Now if you add a wrinkle like the landlord passes a law that no more houses can be built, then my prejudice switches. Or if it is more subtle like you can't build with the same kind of materials, or reuse a concept like footings.
I oppose that kind of rent-seeking. But it's not the rent-seeking to which I object. It's the moating.
Of course, it's hard to build a new house even without moating. I see too often people who just pay rent because it's inconvenient to look for alternative housing. And building their own seems way too hard. Their own creation would never have the bells and whistles of what they are renting.
Wells Fargo is a perfect example. You get cheated and abused and swindled, but you don't leave. Microsoft was an example for a very long time. Intel has been an example. Amazon is in a big way.
"There's no other option," people cry. But of course there is. Regarding Autodesk, FreeCAD is an option. "Not even close!" some claim. MicroStation? "No way." Solidworks? "Well..."
Build your own, rent from somebody else, go homeless, or stay where you are and pay your rent. And if somebody makes it illegal to do anything but the last, revolt. But don't claim there's no other way if you just mean you want to be entitled.
* Edited for typos *
- ezconnect 4y agoYou need to add what Autodesk is doing here, features where available during the initial contract and being revised as me move along. It's like adding a rent for every flush of your toilet and also paying for the cost of water.
- Thorrez 4y agoCan you ask for a refund since features that you paid for have been removed?
- ezconnect 4y agoIt's illogical to request refund since the feature is still there it's just modified and since you were paying rent when it was still there and now your option is to stop renting.
- Thorrez 4y agoI guess I'm not familiar with Autodesk. Is it always paid by subscription? There's no way to pay a one-time price? Even if it is just subscription, what is the length of the subscription? If it's say 1 year, you could ask for a refund for the rest of the year since they've changed what they're giving you.
- supportlocal4h 4y agoOk, landlord removes toilet while raising rent. Scummy landlord? Maybe. But I still question the tenant more. Why keep renting? Because living in tent doesn't get you a toilet and loses a lot. So build your own house! Or pay someone to build you a house. Or join forces with 10 others and build a hostel with decent toilets, or a tent campground with a bathhouse. Move to a different building with higher rent. Or just sit in your dump apartment, keep paying rent, and complain about the toilet. Yeah, that's the best choice. What's that? It's a 3-bath that still has 2 working toilets and a great kitchen? It's not a total dump? It's kind of a dump but close to awesome schools? Look, is it worth the rent or not? Stay and pay, or leave. What's that? It costs money and trouble for a moving van? Sigh. It sure does.
- ezconnect 4y agoThe problem is there is no option when all the landlords are scummy.
- rich_sasha 4y agoI mostly agree. Perhaps another analogy would put Autodesk (or any other rent-seeking company) as a mildly abusive partner, with similarly clear options: put up, find another partner, go single etc. Doesn't mean the mildly abusive partner isn't mildly abusive. (Clearly Autodesk is withing their rights here, I'm not suggesting otherwise).
- vianneychevalie 4y agoThe basis of your comparison is a bit weak: you’re delving into legal entity anthropomorphism. A person, sure! A company? I don’t think it holds up. A company has no sense of morality, no career duration, no children or relatives to take care of. It has a duty to take care of shareholders. When the way it choses to do that naturally comes to oppose our ethics, we legislate.