this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2023
1293 points (83.1% liked)

Memes

45653 readers
1417 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de 53 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Please, not this again.... Personally, I am a lot in favour of communism. But some people, especially US Americans, have a fundamentally wrong idea about the housing shown in the upper picture.

This is often neither cheap, nor does it reduce homelessness. And it's also not the goal of that kind of rental homes to reduce homelessness.

That is just normal homes of average people in many places.

It's not "cheap housing for everyone".

[–] zephyreks@lemmy.ml 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Those houses were built by state-backed actors to support growing urbanization and create a housing surplus for that urbanization to give the workers more power since they no longer have to deal with aggressively rent-seeking private landlords.

Wait, isn't that communism?

[–] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No they weren't built to give "the workers more power". You still have landlords and sometimes hefty prices on these apartments. Depending on the country/city.

[–] zephyreks@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

Excess housing supply doesn't commoditize housing and give working-class people more choice? Hmm...

[–] teuniac_@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] SoaringDE@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

Welfare state would be if the state took over half the rent payments, for example. Building more houses, that are not owned by the government is examplatory of a planned economy and the aspect of doing it to give more negotiating power to the average worker is a communistic idea.

[–] uis@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

This is often neither cheap, nor does it reduce homelessness.

If we are talking about cities, humant colonies are cheapest housing. Buuut kinda crap.

And it's also not the goal of that kind of rental homes to reduce homelessness.

Don't look like rental homes to me.

[–] Juturna@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why doesn't it look like rental homes? I think it does. We had a lot of buildings built here in Northern Europe where I'm at that they built between 1965-1975 in the suburbs of our capital city when they built a large number of apartments during those years to alleviate the shortage of available homes.

People still live in them today, they are not beautiful but they are functional, and it's all rentals pretty much.

[–] uis@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

They aren't rental in Russia. And likely in most if not all ex-Soviet states.

[–] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How do they not look like rental homes? We have similar building in Germany. They are mostly build by companies and smaller versions of these homes are even build by private people. Because like this you can maximize profit on your property.

[–] uis@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Or build affordable housing, if goal is not maximizing profit. They at least aren't rental where I live.

[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

There is a reason why cringe tankie bullshit is the worst enemy of actual leftist policy.

[–] tryptaminev@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago

In the 2000s and onwards yes. Because often these were sold to private investors in the capitalization of former communist/socialist countries.

At the time when they were built they did provide a great improvement in housing, especially as most of eastern Europe has been terrible destroyed by the Nazis.

[–] RichCaffeineFlavor@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

that kind of rental homes

The top picture isn't capitalism; there are no landlords.

[–] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What are you talking about? Of course these type of buildings have landlords.

[–] RichCaffeineFlavor@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago

Why do you have to bother me with an inbox notification if you can't even follow what the conversation is about?