3 ms·
It doesn't apply so well. It's not just about the kids you raise. It's about the fact that people's parents and grandparents and uncles and cousins live nearby.
by sophacles 13y ago
It doesn't apply so well. It's not just about the kids you raise. It's about the fact that people's parents and grandparents and uncles and cousins live nearby. It's about friendships built over years. It's about community. What you're saying is this:
Fuck those people - they don't deserve community nor the benefits of it they worked for, because they can't afford the prices you are willing to pay to kick them out (despite most of them being decent citizens with jobs and everything).
It's kinda messed up. Not saying I have a solution, just pointing out a real problem.
- epicureanideal 13y agoSo the ability to live in San Francisco should become an inherited right? Or at least being first in line for housing? Oh, I see, your parents lived here Mr. X, so even though Mr. Y is offering more money, I'll cast that newcomer aside. He isn't one of "us", who belong here.
- sophacles 13y agoGetting a little hostile aren't you? I actually flat out said I don't have a solution, so whatever the heck you are reacting to your own insecurity at something. I merely pointed out that what you propose has problems. And that your attitude is simply: anyone who can't afford it deserves to not have their lives considered. Honestly, you are saying that the only consideration people should have for one another is net worth and that interpersonal relationships are of no value, yet you are angry that your lack of those same things could be used to keep you from spending your money (suggesting value). This is a pretty strange. I do think that perhaps some consideration besides "number of dollars" should be taken in situations like this, because I don't really think a group of people should be able to so fundamentally fuck over another group because they can afford to. But those are my ethics - I value respecting people on more than money.