3 ms·
> Then people should be humble enough to live on the very little. Not ask for some other entity to provide its people with so much more (like full housing). Th
by anonymouskimmer 4y ago
> Then people should be humble enough to live on the very little. Not ask for some other entity to provide its people with so much more (like full housing).
This applies to all people, not just those at the bottom. Yet those at the top keep charging high rates, or NIMBY against building more housing because of the effect of that housing on their quality of life and net worth. When you NIMBY, or charge high rates, you are asking other entities (those at the bottom) to provide you with so much more.
- beebeepka 4y agoMaybe I am too quick to judge but this strikes me as a completely uncalled for US-centric know it all take.
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoThis is a standard critique of capitalism, mercantilism, feudalism, state communism, and whatever your -ism of choice is. It's been done the world over for millennia. Every time someone in power or privilege has said "we must all sacrifice for the greater good" - the sacrifice is disproportionate, and those disproportionately affected have grumbled about it. Every time someone has said "we must preserve this particular thing", the preservation has been at the disproportionate expense of others, and those so affected have grumbled about it.
- ChuckNorris89 4y agoOf course, "sacrifice for thee, not for mee". See the Bank of England chief telling everyone they need to accept we're now all poorer otherwise inflation will never stop. Of course, by "us all being poorer" he most likely didn't include the wealthy elites and asset owning class that have made bank these past years and are in no way poorer than before, quite the contrary. It was the same during covid. "We all need to scarifice to ...." meant something else entirely.
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoOh, we must all sacrifice the right to sleep on the street. Even the richest among us. :D