• TrueStoryBob@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Quick reminder: The Nazi German government emptied out Eastern European towns and villages taken by the Wehrmacht during various campaigns, most notably Operation Barbarossa, for resettlement of “pure” Germans to those occupied lands (called Lebensraum)… this started almost literally once these occupied towns and villages were far enough from the front lines. Also, the whole point of the US Government’s genocidal forced march of native tribes, often referred to as the Tail of Tears, was to clear said native tribes out so the Southern aristocracy could seize the land for plantations worked by chattel slaves… whole swaths of what is today Florida, Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi were settled by whites as a result.

    Many a “populist” (read: Fascist or proto-Fascist) operate their politics in this manner. Promise either cheap land (or, at the very least, housing) to the workers and others by committing what is, on it’s face, a genocide. There’s more modern examples (two in particular, going on right this minute for all the world to see), but I don’t want to get the ban-hammer so I won’t name them directly (I forgot to check the instance in which I am commenting before doing so, but not taking my chances).

    • daddy32@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Additionally, “Mass deportation” is a fucking genocide, I don’t know how this can even be said loudly. Guess people never learn…

  • bufalo1973@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    12 hours ago

    I have one “weird” and “radical” proposal: public housing to rent. Not to but. At affordable price. That would lower the price of every house, flat, …

  • Gaspar@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Donald John Trump comes from a family of real estate speculators.

    Akira Toriyama once said he based the character of Freeza on Japanese real estate speculators, who he called “the worst kind of people.” (Source)

    Am I saying Trump is Freeza? No, Freeza is several orders of magnitude more competent on his worst day than Trump was when he peaked in 1951. But I think it’s important to underline, for the people in the back, what level of cartoonish evil we’re dealing with, because for some reason people will read stuff like this and it won’t sink in. Maybe DBZ will help.

    I don’t know. I’m tired, y’all.

  • COASTER1921@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    15 hours ago

    If they really wanted to change regulations they’d push changing zoning regulations in cities to allow building anything other than detached single family housing. That would be totally reasonable and help alongside tax incentives. But I have a feeling that’s not what’s meant by changing regulations…

    • WolfLink@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      13 hours ago

      They said “making federal land available”. I take that as they want to sell off land in places like national parks to be developed.

      Which, needless to say, is an awful idea.

    • somethingp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      15 hours ago

      I thinks that’s one of those state’s rights things where federal government can’t just tell a town how to zone it’s own land unless they’re taking it away from the town like for a national Park or something.

      • terry_jerry@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        It’s actually an instance of super small government. Those regulations are dictated by city’s and counties not by states

    • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      The american dream isnt raising a family in an apartment, and a lot of people were raised on that dream.

      We need to change the perception of condensed housing I think before there is support for that.

      • capital@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 hours ago

        My perception of dense housing is smelling cigarettes and weed and hearing fighting, dogs barking, loud exhaust, and loud bass for hours on end.

        I think we change the perception by enforcing rules to keep people from disturbing others peace at home. Make it a reality that dense housing isn’t a worse experience. That isn’t currently the case.

        I’d be much more apt to go back to dense housing if I was confident that my complaints would be heard and actioned up to and including evicting the offenders (after many complaints and no corrective actions taken). But I have never heard of such a place.

      • bob_lemon@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        13 hours ago

        The best way to change perception of mixed use residential areas is having people live there.

        The bigger issue is that these buildings don’t work by themselves. The biggest issue with suburbia is car dependency, which can only be countered by walkable cities and public transport (both of which require higher population densities)

        • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          I had another idea, if we reduced meat production we would get back land, could use that to make more houses. Sort of short term I guess. Or maybe its easier to plan a walkable city if you are starting with a blank slate.

          What do you think of building new cities rather than retrofitting old ones?

          • COASTER1921@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 hours ago

            Land isn’t the problem, even in suburbia large commercial complexes fail all the time or rich people get some grand ambition to build their perfect city outside of the existing one. For example Las Colinas outside of Dallas. Or Rosslyn outside of Washington DC. These were planned in one go to be the ideal future of urbanism at their respective times, and there are many other examples beyond these. The issue lately if the local opposition is small or poor is zoning requirements and parking minimums drastically increasing costs.

            • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 hours ago

              Unless those requirements and costs are entirely padded numbers, they are there to handle the amount of cars people will be using right?

              How do we reduce car usage if we can’t make walkable cities because of cars?

      • COASTER1921@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        Before you can start to change public perception it needs to be legal to build densely. Parking minimums and a variety of other commercial building code regulations make this much more expensive in the US, all while the people nearby in single family homes fight any new builds due to their poor perception of condos and apartments. Just removing the stigma is only one part of the equation.

    • 24_at_the_withers@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Because being poor, uneducated, and unloved with a chip on your shoulder makes you a likely Republican voter. I would bet the whole farm that unwanted children are far more likely to grow up to vote Republican, and I think that’s one of the primary reasons they fight against abortion, and any other policies that increase education and security for children.

    • NudistWardrobe@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Yep, the big fix is to tax the hell out of single family housing owned by corporations. But no politician would dare run on that platform.

      • assassinatedbyCIA@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Or just build more public housing. It can be nice. It doesn’t have to be dystopian blocks in the sky and it should target all price ranges so that poverty isn’t just entrenched into public housing blocks.

  • rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    18 hours ago

    $25k down payment assistance where one bed one bath houses are routinely nearly half a million is a joke tbh.

    • Match!!@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 hours ago

      it’s down payment assistance, and down payment is typically around 20% of the value of the house. $25k would fully cover the down payment of a $125k [probably trashed] house, or 1/4th of the down payment of a half-million house

    • Hazzard@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      Honestly I really don’t think that’s effective either. Giving people more money to buy something generally just means the market will respond by charging more money for that thing. The assistance will effectively get “priced in” given time.

      It’s honestly the weakest part of the Harris/Walz platform for me. Trump plan is utterly insane top-to-bottom though, and they’re just using immigration as a scapegoat here, which is… something.

      • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Makes sense to me. 25k is an incentive to buy a home, not an incentive to build one or sell one.

        Make owning multiple homes more expensive. Fine landlords for unfilled housing, and make the fine is proportional to maximum advertised rate for the unit. Now they have an incentive to keep their units filled, and keep from jacking up rent.

      • GladiusB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        16 hours ago

        I do think it can help those that are prepared and on the border of approval. But those that aren’t it ain’t gonna do shit.

        • Hazzard@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Yeah, I don’t think the idea is a total non-starter, but I’d definitely like some details. How will this be limited to ensure it’s not being used by investors and house flippers? How will this be ramped down once the housing market settles to avoid it being permanently “priced in”? How will this be paid for and how much will it cost?

          Unfortunately American political debates right now are more of a pissing contest about rally turnout than they are about actual policy details, because that’s what sways the voters on the fence for some reason.

          • GladiusB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            15 hours ago

            I started getting tons of calls because I was approved last year when she announced this. So if it can get me into something I want to know. But it just might be bullshit.

    • Optional@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      That’s not everywhere in America. That’s not even most of America.

      And while it’s an interesting discussion, it’s not the point of the post.

  • madcaesar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I hate any financial assistance that doesn’t address the root cause, because all it is at that point is more tax and wealth transfer to the rich.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Aaaaaand I know everyone hates when someone points out their hypocrisy so I’m sure I’ll get crucified for this…

      This applies to student loan forgiveness too.

      • madcaesar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Absolutely. I’m for student loan forgiveness, but right now it’s just giving money to banks and then burdening the next generation with the cost.

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      14 hours ago

      That’s the feature of these issues, there is no incentive for people “fixing” them to end the grift.

  • Liz@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    The only thing proposed that’s reasonable is “changing regulation.” It’s too easy to block new housing, and often times it’s just flat out illegal to increase density or build mixed use.

    • StructuredPair@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      16 hours ago

      But those regulations are largely controlled by local governments, not the federal government. Federal regulations can prevent building new housing in certain areas and conditions (like destroying habitat of an endangered species), but that is much rarer than a city council not approving projects or zoning changes because they want to keep property values high.

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        15 hours ago

        And that needs to change. Local communities are harming the nation with their NIMBY shit. Feds should step in.

        • terry_jerry@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          14 hours ago

          I mean they kinda are, but those areas just miss out on tax dollars of larger scale developments. I’d rather see more support and for lower cost housing that doesn’t get flipped immediately into airbnbs. Stronger regulations that temper this current market of turning housing into a commodity where speculative reality businesses are out bidding home owners. That goes for single family and multifamily. U can build a huge priced right housing development but if all the units just turn into air bnb or rented out by shitty land lords, then we have solved nothing

          • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            14 hours ago

            In the macro picture, more supply always helps. Flood the market with airbnbs and airbnb owners can’t charge as much so they’ll stop buying so many. More rentals lowers prices so you don’t have to rent from a slumlord.

            But I agree, direct legislation is more immediate and effective.

    • WolfLink@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      It depends on which regulations. The second part of that “making federal land available” makes me think they want to develop national parks.

  • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    thinking that homeless illegal immigrants are the root cause of home shortage where a single corporation or a billionaire buys thousands of flats to rent them to people for exorbitant prices.

    in one way it works because if you kick out many homeless people out of the country, you can say that in one year you cut homelessness by half.

  • njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    14 hours ago

    I still can’t get over the other lack of journalistic integrity for CBS to put that up there. To concede that point. Like it’s a fact. Utter bollocks.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Neither choice is great. One is evil.

    That 25k quickly becomes “oh, everyone had 25k more so we can charge 25k more”.

    Don’t give rich house builders tax breaks, they’re the ones causing the problem by deliberately not building enough. You’re the fucking government. Build houses yourselves. Rent them through social housing programs.

      • Blackmist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Yeah, that too.

        The precious “free markets” have had their crack at it, and have shown that they’re not to be trusted to either own or build them. Prices have soared and that’s 100% intentional on their part.

        • Shard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          18 hours ago

          It was never a free market because of antiquated zoning laws. At very least free market would have driven more dense residential construction because they would have made more return on their buck. We need to allow and even promote medium rise residential zoning in more home scarcity is an issue.

          Land owners be damned, the needs of the many outweigh the greed of the few.

    • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      19 hours ago

      25k is for first time home buyers, not everyone. You can’t have separate prices for first time buyers and the rest of the public, and a seller won’t know how you are financed until after the house is listed anyways.

      This absolutely will help, because if you’d just ask anyone trying to get a home, the down payment is the hardest part to satisfy.

      The only way a house cartel can form like this is for those that own the homes. The builders don’t own the homes, corporations do. Those corporations collude and price fix to create a cartel. Focus on that.

      • ECB@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        19 hours ago

        The UK had a similar scheme for first time buyers and it’s often cited by economists as one of the biggest things fueling their housing crisis.

        • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Its hard to take that at face value. The UK and the US have a lot of anti consumer perspectives.

          Do you have anything that describes the mechanism?

          Its sort of a similar arguement to food stamps raising food prices right?

          In either case its on the groups abusing a rule that are the problem, not the rule. There can be well worded regulations that minimize abuse, and we can also audit things.

    • HasturInYellow@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      19 hours ago

      The builders have made the 16 million empty homes in this country because they were just selling them to corporations. It’s not that they are not hiding enough, it’s that the rich have engulfed the entire pipe with their gluttonous mouths and there is nothing left for the rest of us.

      When will we finally slay the beasts that are killing us?

    • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      18 hours ago

      It’s not that they aren’t building enough. It’s that they are building big luxury homes because there is a bigger profit margin than making affordable homes.

    • MrMcGasion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      22 hours ago

      I’ve started to come around on the 25k down payment assistance. It definitely has it’s problems, and there will absolutely be those who gouge because of it. But because it’s specifically down-payment assistance it will still help first time buyers get mortgages on houses they can afford the regular payments on, but don’t have the extra to set aside for a 10% down payment because rent is taking everything they could be setting aside for a down payment. And it’s limited to first time home buyers, with 2 years of on-time rent payments, and says “up to” 25k. Wouldn’t surprise me if it ends up being limited to 10% of the purchase price (which gets you more favorable loan terms).

      • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        20 hours ago

        My wife and I only own our home because her wealthy dad was willing to front about half of the down payment with an interest-free repayment to him alongside the mortgage. With 25k from the government we’d not have needed that, and we got an acre in California. 25k is huge.

        We’ve only ever had trouble with this mortgage once, and it was trouble we could have managed without help had we just tightened our belts for a while (just don’t go to the ER. Even if you have insurance. Even if you’re dying on the floor and an ex first responder demands you to for your safety: die instead. I am not joking, had it not been for familial help we’d be paying it off for the next 5 years and it would eat almost all of the little savings we’ve finally started managing to build up, so one more bump and we’d lose fucking everything), so it looks like all those “well sure you can afford rent that’s 1.5x the cost of the potential mortgage, but how do we know you can afford it on the job you’ve had for 8 years?” Pricks were wrooooooooooong

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Most builders are already fully booked for work. The one’s that could work faster generally aren’t the ones you want building your house.