8 ms·

Jeff Bezos is buying up single-family homes to rent-trap humanity forever

quantified 4y ago
You bought from Amazon, you signed up for Amazon Prime, you made it happen. Consumers who support concentrations of wealth reap what they sow. Better to distribute your money more locally and to more providers than focus it one place far away. But sorta too late now.
- amelius 4y ago
  How is that true for a person who is born today? You can't win a game of Monopoly if you enter the game a few rounds after it started.
  - quantified 4y ago
    They don't need to buy from Amazon. AWS is here to stay.
    - amelius 4y ago
      But they do face a spoiled renters' market.
      - quantified 4y ago
        I agree, they're behind from the start. Lots of other market spoilers too for that matter. Our points coexist.
        amelius 4y ago
        > Our points coexist. And you don't think that these points have anything to do with eachother?
        quantified 4y ago
        They're related in time and space for sure. > How is that true for a person who is born today? A person born today doesn't need to buy anything from Amazon. They just don't. They may want to but it's not necessary. A person born 50 years ago doesn't either. Makes no difference when they're born.
- eesmith 4y ago
  Don't put the blame solely on "consumers". There's also the laws which allow (or don't prevent) this concentration to occur. The usual litany includes: - the tax bracket for the wealthiest should be 90% or higher, like it used to be. - have a global wealth tax - remove Taft-Hartley limitations on union power and prohibit so-called "right-to-work" laws. - have strong protections for renters
  - quantified 4y ago
    No one other than consumers sent them money. I don't recall government subsidies or loans to them, fill me in if I missed them. Everyone who sends them money is aware of the tax situation, or isn't really aware of their environment. You'd think the original market of book-buyers would have been a little more clued in.
    - eesmith 4y ago
      "Amazon to get $124M tax break to build NY warehouse" - https://nypost.com/2022/08/10/amazon-to-get-124m-tax-break-to-build-niagara-warehouse-report/ https://nypost.com/2022/08/10/amazon-to-get-124m-tax-break-t... "Amazon has secured $670 million in tax breaks this year" - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/amazon-tax-breaks-670-million-good-jobs-first/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/amazon-tax-breaks-670-million-g... "Inside Amazon's massive subsidy in Niagara" - https://www.investigativepost.org/2022/09/02/inside-amazons-massive-subsidy-in-niagara/ https://www.investigativepost.org/2022/09/02/inside-amazons-... "Amazon Is Thriving Thanks to Taxpayer Dollars" - https://newrepublic.com/article/146540/amazon-thriving-thanks-taxpayer-dollars https://newrepublic.com/article/146540/amazon-thriving-thank...
      - quantified 4y ago
        2018 was already too late. Tax subsidies for warehouses: why are they building those warehouses? To supply the purchasers. If all my business had for the year was tax breaks, I have no revenue.
        4y ago
- rtev 4y ago
  While this shouldn’t legally be allowed to happen, in my opinion, I do agree. Consumers don’t feel any ownership of the bigger picture. Most people refuse to make ethical purchasing decisions and happily give their money to people they know are doing terrible things. How can that be changed?
  - superchroma 4y ago
    In schools. Impress upon kids that they need to own the complete set of consequences to their choices.
  - jaybrendansmith 4y ago
    We expect that our government 'for the people' will have our backs, and make sure people can afford homes.
    - kodyo 4y ago
      We’re in the loot-the-treasury phase of imperial collapse, sir. Sorry.
nathanaldensr 4y ago
Nice hyperbolic headline. That said, Jeff Bezos is a ghoul.
renewiltord 4y ago
Haha, you can't do that unless we refuse to build other houses. We could also keep property taxes really low so Jeff Bezos would find it easy to hold the houses. We're a very pro-Jeff-Bezos country.
ggreer 4y ago
Right out of the gate it makes this claim: > That investors are extractive parasites who weaponize capital to passively extract wealth from the contributor class. I’m reminded of David Friedman’s explanation as to why this isn’t the case: > Marx argued as follows: Goods are produced by workers using tools (machines, factories, and so forth). The tools were themselves made by earlier workers. All production is done by workers, either current workers or past workers. But the capitalist claims some of the return from the production. His justification is that he has provided the tools; this is invalid since the tools were actually produced by previous workers. The capitalist who, having contributed nothing to production, takes part of the product is obviously stealing from—exploiting—the real producers, the workers. The trouble with this argument is that it does not recognize that paying for tools today and waiting for years to get the money back is itself a productive activity and that the interest earned by capital is the corresponding payment. It’s the same for mortgages and renting. If we banned renting and required people to purchase their shelter with 100% cash (no loans), people would live in much worse homes (or be homeless). The investors provide the capital to build the homes much sooner than they otherwise would be, then wait decades before recouping their costs. They also assume quite a bit of risk. A lot can go wrong before they make their money back.
- petra 4y ago
  These are theoretical claims and i don't agree with them. And yes we can philosophize all day long. But let's look at an empirical fact: We've seen how easy access to capital(some to investors, some to buyers) has created a global real-estate bubble. Creating easy access to capital for real-estate investments is excatly what this startup does, so the results should be the same if this becomes common.
- pastacacioepepe 4y ago
  Ah yes, Friedman, one of the Chicago boys (same people who happily worked with Pinochet) and proud Anarcho capitalist. Kinda invalidates anything he might argue for, to me.
  - cholantesh 4y ago
xwkd 4y ago
> people who love money will not stop until they are stopped. Define “stopped” in this context. Never mind that the author incessantly links to himself.. What suggestions does he offer? We’re on the road to serfdom. Great. Cool. What do?
- superchroma 4y ago
  tax land?
- petra 4y ago
  Here are some offers, by the author: https://survivingtomorrow.org/this-real-estate-bubble-wont-pop-2f52f23709f8 https://survivingtomorrow.org/this-real-estate-bubble-wont-p...
- soganess 4y ago
  The article is incredulous at times, I'm not deny that or trying to defend it. However, I don't understand why the author needs to have a solution to present? You wouldn't ask the person running into your burning home to tell you and your sleeping family that the house is on fire for a solution, would you? People need to sound the bell.
- readthenotes1 4y ago
  Given the reference to Smaug, by "stopped", he means shot until killed.
powera 4y ago
The article is pure vitriol, with barely a sprinkling of facts and arguments mixed in.
perfecthjrjth 4y ago
Billionaires don't involve in day-to-day operations of their home office. Here, the investment gurus hired by Bezos make decisions. In other words, Bezos' home office does what any other wall street MBA does.

You bought from Amazon, you signed up for Amazon Prime, you made it happen. Consumers who support concentrations of wealth reap what they sow. Better to distribute your money more locally and to more providers than focus it one place far away. But sorta too late now.

amelius 4y ago
How is that true for a person who is born today? You can't win a game of Monopoly if you enter the game a few rounds after it started.
- quantified 4y ago
  They don't need to buy from Amazon. AWS is here to stay.
  - amelius 4y ago
    But they do face a spoiled renters' market.
    - quantified 4y ago
      I agree, they're behind from the start. Lots of other market spoilers too for that matter. Our points coexist.
      - amelius 4y ago
        > Our points coexist. And you don't think that these points have anything to do with eachother?
        quantified 4y ago
        They're related in time and space for sure. > How is that true for a person who is born today? A person born today doesn't need to buy anything from Amazon. They just don't. They may want to but it's not necessary. A person born 50 years ago doesn't either. Makes no difference when they're born.
eesmith 4y ago
Don't put the blame solely on "consumers". There's also the laws which allow (or don't prevent) this concentration to occur. The usual litany includes: - the tax bracket for the wealthiest should be 90% or higher, like it used to be. - have a global wealth tax - remove Taft-Hartley limitations on union power and prohibit so-called "right-to-work" laws. - have strong protections for renters
- quantified 4y ago
  No one other than consumers sent them money. I don't recall government subsidies or loans to them, fill me in if I missed them. Everyone who sends them money is aware of the tax situation, or isn't really aware of their environment. You'd think the original market of book-buyers would have been a little more clued in.
  - eesmith 4y ago
    "Amazon to get $124M tax break to build NY warehouse" - https://nypost.com/2022/08/10/amazon-to-get-124m-tax-break-to-build-niagara-warehouse-report/ https://nypost.com/2022/08/10/amazon-to-get-124m-tax-break-t... "Amazon has secured $670 million in tax breaks this year" - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/amazon-tax-breaks-670-million-good-jobs-first/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/amazon-tax-breaks-670-million-g... "Inside Amazon's massive subsidy in Niagara" - https://www.investigativepost.org/2022/09/02/inside-amazons-massive-subsidy-in-niagara/ https://www.investigativepost.org/2022/09/02/inside-amazons-... "Amazon Is Thriving Thanks to Taxpayer Dollars" - https://newrepublic.com/article/146540/amazon-thriving-thanks-taxpayer-dollars https://newrepublic.com/article/146540/amazon-thriving-thank...
    - quantified 4y ago
      2018 was already too late. Tax subsidies for warehouses: why are they building those warehouses? To supply the purchasers. If all my business had for the year was tax breaks, I have no revenue.
      - 4y ago
rtev 4y ago
While this shouldn’t legally be allowed to happen, in my opinion, I do agree. Consumers don’t feel any ownership of the bigger picture. Most people refuse to make ethical purchasing decisions and happily give their money to people they know are doing terrible things. How can that be changed?
- superchroma 4y ago
  In schools. Impress upon kids that they need to own the complete set of consequences to their choices.
- jaybrendansmith 4y ago
  We expect that our government 'for the people' will have our backs, and make sure people can afford homes.
  - kodyo 4y ago
    We’re in the loot-the-treasury phase of imperial collapse, sir. Sorry.

nathanaldensr 4y ago

Nice hyperbolic headline. That said, Jeff Bezos is a ghoul.

renewiltord 4y ago

Haha, you can't do that unless we refuse to build other houses. We could also keep property taxes really low so Jeff Bezos would find it easy to hold the houses. We're a very pro-Jeff-Bezos country.

ggreer 4y ago

Right out of the gate it makes this claim: > That investors are extractive parasites who weaponize capital to passively extract wealth from the contributor class. I’m reminded of David Friedman’s explanation as to why this isn’t the case: > Marx argued as follows: Goods are produced by workers using tools (machines, factories, and so forth). The tools were themselves made by earlier workers. All production is done by workers, either current workers or past workers. But the capitalist claims some of the return from the production. His justification is that he has provided the tools; this is invalid since the tools were actually produced by previous workers. The capitalist who, having contributed nothing to production, takes part of the product is obviously stealing from—exploiting—the real producers, the workers. The trouble with this argument is that it does not recognize that paying for tools today and waiting for years to get the money back is itself a productive activity and that the interest earned by capital is the corresponding payment. It’s the same for mortgages and renting. If we banned renting and required people to purchase their shelter with 100% cash (no loans), people would live in much worse homes (or be homeless). The investors provide the capital to build the homes much sooner than they otherwise would be, then wait decades before recouping their costs. They also assume quite a bit of risk. A lot can go wrong before they make their money back.

petra 4y ago
These are theoretical claims and i don't agree with them. And yes we can philosophize all day long. But let's look at an empirical fact: We've seen how easy access to capital(some to investors, some to buyers) has created a global real-estate bubble. Creating easy access to capital for real-estate investments is excatly what this startup does, so the results should be the same if this becomes common.
pastacacioepepe 4y ago
Ah yes, Friedman, one of the Chicago boys (same people who happily worked with Pinochet) and proud Anarcho capitalist. Kinda invalidates anything he might argue for, to me.
- cholantesh 4y ago

xwkd 4y ago

> people who love money will not stop until they are stopped. Define “stopped” in this context. Never mind that the author incessantly links to himself.. What suggestions does he offer? We’re on the road to serfdom. Great. Cool. What do?

superchroma 4y ago
tax land?
petra 4y ago
Here are some offers, by the author: https://survivingtomorrow.org/this-real-estate-bubble-wont-pop-2f52f23709f8 https://survivingtomorrow.org/this-real-estate-bubble-wont-p...
soganess 4y ago
The article is incredulous at times, I'm not deny that or trying to defend it. However, I don't understand why the author needs to have a solution to present? You wouldn't ask the person running into your burning home to tell you and your sleeping family that the house is on fire for a solution, would you? People need to sound the bell.
readthenotes1 4y ago
Given the reference to Smaug, by "stopped", he means shot until killed.

powera 4y ago

The article is pure vitriol, with barely a sprinkling of facts and arguments mixed in.

perfecthjrjth 4y ago

Billionaires don't involve in day-to-day operations of their home office. Here, the investment gurus hired by Bezos make decisions. In other words, Bezos' home office does what any other wall street MBA does.