If you pay 1% for one house, someone with 2 houses should pay 2%, and a company with 2000 homes should pay 2000%

That would make it increasingly difficult for mega companies to buy up everything and torture the housing market

  • PapaStevesy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 days ago

    That’s like saying people with major medical issues “are looking for” insurance salespeople to fix their medical issues. They “need” insurance because the system is fucked, not because insurance will make them better. Likewise, no one “looks for” a landlord, they look for housing they can afford.

      • PapaStevesy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        You mean the taxpayers can’t afford it, and you’re wrong. Trillionaires exist, we could afford anything we want to if we had people in charge willing to tax them fairly.

        Regardless, the potential cost difference doesn’t negate my previous point, no one has ever “looked for a landlord”.

        • MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          That’s not an individual country’s decision to take. People look for housing and landlords provide a valuable service to society.

          • PapaStevesy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            That’s not an individual country’s decision to take.

            What isn’t? How to tax it’s citizens? Pretty sure individual countries are the only ones making that decision.

            People look for housing and landlords provide a valuable service to society

            Almost, people need housing and landlords can exploit that need. Renters provide a valuable service to landlords. How about this analogy: people need food, but that doesn’t mean every single company that sells food is good for society, or even good for the individual people they sell to. Many are the opposite, at least in the US. Look I’m not arguing for banning buying more than one property, though I’m not against it, all I’m saying is that your claim that people “look for” landlords is absurd.

      • kestrel7_7@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        No, what the government actually can’t afford is to have homeless people overutilizing public services (ambulances, police, hospitals, and jails) because they don’t have stable housing. It’s way, wayyy cheaper to provide people free housing than let them be homeless, Finland has proved this with basic arithmetic, our culture is just really into performative cruelty for some reason.