3 ms·
While I'm onboard with your argument, fundamentally you are arguing for a reduction in capitailism/free market. One might describe your suggestions as socialis
by bruce511 3y ago
While I'm onboard with your argument, fundamentally you are arguing for a reduction in capitailism/free market.
One might describe your suggestions as socialism (not communism, there's a difference.)
Again, I'm onboard myself, I prefer the democratic-socislism of Western Europe to the unrestricted capitalism of the US.
Unfortunately though your argument carries no real weight in the US because there money is king, and the only thing that matters is the bottom line. Capitalism will keep pushing every boundary (unrestricted by a court system paid for by capitalists) because social-good, and ethics are simply not highly valued.
Even by framing your argument as 'socialist', I immediately negate it in the minds of most Americans (who equate socialism either capitalism.)
Alas nations have a psyche, and "caring" is not in the American psyche.
Could it change? Sure. But I'm jaded enough not to expect it anytime soon. It'll only change when grass-roots people want it to change, and judging by election results up and down the ballot, there's no real swing in that direction.
- exe34 3y agoNo, I think he's arguing for a free-er market. He's saying that landlords should have more information, that they should be told how much strife they are imposing on their community by pushing their parasitic behaviour to its limit.
- mateo1 3y agoIt's naive to think they don't already know.