4 ms·
In my opinion government should be subsidizing private companies to compete for creative solutions to solve the problem and reward the winner that solves it. Wh
by proc0 4y ago
In my opinion government should be subsidizing private companies to compete for creative solutions to solve the problem and reward the winner that solves it. Whatever the solution I think we've seen government has not been able to solve it. Maybe some business can give some basic work in exchange for food and housing, and for laws to adjust and allow this. If enough of these types of jobs existed it could be a way out of homelessness.
And I agree, although housing is the objective, it's not necessarily the solution to the problem, mainly because of how markets keep going up and space is limited. People need a way to start earning income without worrying about rent.
- dathos 4y agoHow about we start actively taxing private companies that feel the need to make a quick buck over people backs? Especially without contributing any real value to society, and with society I don't mean the economy.
- TheGigaChad 4y ago[dead]
- luckylion 4y agoWho decides what is "real value" and how much of it is being contributed by some activity?
- alistairSH 4y agoWe can start by implementing policies designed to reduce rent seeking activities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking
- golergka 4y agoHow about we solve society's problems without taking other people's property with violence or threat of violence?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- amanaplanacanal 4y agoExactly. Make private property “owners” give it back to the public.
- golergka 4y agoYou're saying "exactly" and then advocate exactly the opposite of what I'm talking about. "Making" somebody do something with their property is the very definition of violence.
- amanaplanacanal 4y agoI was being a bit tongue in cheek, but all of your private property originally came from the commons. It seems arbitrary to call retrieving stolen property violence, but not the original theft.
- zo1 4y agoEmotions about the unfairness of profiteering companies aside. How would you even define those properties. "quick buck", "over people's backs", "contributing real value", "to society"? It's easy when you have a nebulous and noble goal, but you have to define it in terms that make sense and can be quantified and defined. Otherwise you'll just create a "Ministry for Company Fairness Contributions" filled with angry people that will abuse their powers for any number of reasons falling on the "evil/noble" scale.
- slv77 4y agoRents and speculation or any activity that allows someone to siphon off the productive gains of society that they had no hand in producing. For example, a company in nowhere-ville develops Mr. Fusion (home edition) and needs to expand rapidly. Rents and land prices double overnight which results in the cost of labor rising which slows expansion. There are many opportunities for rent extraction in capitalistic systems and some degree of rent and speculation are necessary to establish a market but when society allows for excessive rent taking and speculation it becomes dead weight on productive investment. For example the “billion dollar industry” for sand that makes computer chips (https://www.wired.com/story/book-excerpt-science-of-ultra-pure-silicon/ https://www.wired.com/story/book-excerpt-science-of-ultra-pu...) is an example of companies with little or no investment in the technology around chips who were able to extract large sums of money simply by controlling a sand pile.
- alistairSH 4y agoIncreased property taxes on non-resident owners.
- gruez 4y agoThat tilts the housing market (ie. buying/selling houses, rather than leases) to favor resident owners, but it makes it even more expensive for people who have to rent because the tax ends up being passed onto the renters.
- alistairSH 4y ago