11 ms·

And what are we doing about CORPORATIONS buying up our neighborhoods? As far as I know, NOTHING.

chii 4y ago
"our" neighborhood implies that you own it - so if you owned something, and sold it, how can you complain that someone (or gasp, a corporation) is buying when you're selling?
- LBJsPNS 4y ago
  - DAVer98 4y ago
    This is why nations as a whole are being done away with by the market controllers who have the capital.
  - missedthecue 4y ago
    Textbook NIMBYism. Just because you bought a place does not entitle you to having the surrounding vicinity stay in stasis until you leave.
  - robertlagrant 4y ago
    Here are some of the guidelines for participating here: Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3." Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. Eschew flamebait. Avoid unrelated controversies, generic tangents, and internet tropes. Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.
  - esoterica 4y ago
    You live here but you don’t own your neighbors homes and you have no right to tell them what they can do with them. Who cares what “reason” you bought your home for, that is literally no one else’s problem but yours. You’re no different from the HOA tyrants who scream at their neighbors for painting their house the wrong color.
- xkcd1963 4y ago
  One needs a place to live.
- NonNefarious 4y ago
  No; it implies that WE own it. I can complain because corporations enjoy purchasing advantages not available to individuals. Massive amounts of capital, for one thing, not to mention tax breaks and economies of scale that make it easy for them to dispense with financing and inspection contingencies. When an elderly person dies and the children who inherit his property all live out of state, they're going to dump the property and split the proceeds. And they're going to maximize those proceeds and minimize the time to realize them. Corporations can take advantage of that. So no, WE did not decide to sell. Think it through.
  - chii 4y ago
    > they're going to dump the property and split the proceeds. so you do agree that it is the individual that made the decision to sell, and that it isn't because the corporation is forcing them to sell. Therefore, the character changes or selling is really just a sum of the aggregate behaviour of all of those individuals. It's like blaming the flood, when each individual rain drop is the reason for the flood in the first place.
    - NonNefarious 4y ago
      You can float strawmen and invalid analogies all day, if that's how you get your jollies.

chii 4y ago

"our" neighborhood implies that you own it - so if you owned something, and sold it, how can you complain that someone (or gasp, a corporation) is buying when you're selling?

LBJsPNS 4y ago
- DAVer98 4y ago
  This is why nations as a whole are being done away with by the market controllers who have the capital.
- missedthecue 4y ago
  Textbook NIMBYism. Just because you bought a place does not entitle you to having the surrounding vicinity stay in stasis until you leave.
- robertlagrant 4y ago
  Here are some of the guidelines for participating here: Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3." Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. Eschew flamebait. Avoid unrelated controversies, generic tangents, and internet tropes. Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.
- esoterica 4y ago
  You live here but you don’t own your neighbors homes and you have no right to tell them what they can do with them. Who cares what “reason” you bought your home for, that is literally no one else’s problem but yours. You’re no different from the HOA tyrants who scream at their neighbors for painting their house the wrong color.
xkcd1963 4y ago
One needs a place to live.
NonNefarious 4y ago
No; it implies that WE own it. I can complain because corporations enjoy purchasing advantages not available to individuals. Massive amounts of capital, for one thing, not to mention tax breaks and economies of scale that make it easy for them to dispense with financing and inspection contingencies. When an elderly person dies and the children who inherit his property all live out of state, they're going to dump the property and split the proceeds. And they're going to maximize those proceeds and minimize the time to realize them. Corporations can take advantage of that. So no, WE did not decide to sell. Think it through.
- chii 4y ago
  > they're going to dump the property and split the proceeds. so you do agree that it is the individual that made the decision to sell, and that it isn't because the corporation is forcing them to sell. Therefore, the character changes or selling is really just a sum of the aggregate behaviour of all of those individuals. It's like blaming the flood, when each individual rain drop is the reason for the flood in the first place.
  - NonNefarious 4y ago
    You can float strawmen and invalid analogies all day, if that's how you get your jollies.