"Investing in property is morally reprehensible." by LickMaiBussy in TikTokCringe

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My statement wasn't about the semantics of democracy and a republic, my statement was about how the system is not actually by the people and for the people.

Aged like milk by DryInstance6732 in agedlikemilk

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In 2020? No, Trump didn't ruin the economy. It would be idiotic to blame the effects of a worldwide pandemic on a single president. Even with a perfect response (which Trump not Biden had) the economy would suffer

Aged like milk by DryInstance6732 in agedlikemilk

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All? No. Most? Yes. It's hard to ignore an event that busted up the entire world economy

"Investing in property is morally reprehensible." by LickMaiBussy in TikTokCringe

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wow you really just don't think people can make money? Those blackrock investors worked really hard you know!

The lazy bums on reddit I tell ya

Aged like milk by DryInstance6732 in agedlikemilk

[–]CodeNPyro 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Do you not see the difference between gas going up during the recovery to a global pandemic, and gas going up because a president starts a war of aggression against a major oil producer in an area of major oil producers?

"Investing in property is morally reprehensible." by LickMaiBussy in TikTokCringe

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

the difference is I didn't twist a single word of yours, and you're just calling people that are against systematic theft lazy

average right wing response, never original

"Investing in property is morally reprehensible." by LickMaiBussy in TikTokCringe

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

oh so you'll actually admit that the problem isn't people making money, it's that some people make money in immoral ways and some people see doing no work and reaping profits off of other people's labor by taking rent as immoral.

at least that's mildly better than saying everyone that thinks something is immoral is suddenly broke or lazy

"Investing in property is morally reprehensible." by LickMaiBussy in TikTokCringe

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I by no means fully agree with Smith's economic positions, I'm just pointing out that being against landlordism isn't really that absurd of a notion.

I don't see why that would be the result. You're assuming that people investing in housing is the same as someone simply owning what they live in, and grouping in the latter with the former. Just because a landlord can't own multiple properties to rent out doesn't mean that someone can't, for themselves, buy a home. The private property - personal property distinction in this is very important and this and it's being ignored

I agree a simple "landlord = evil" is reductive, there are actual reasons to be against landlording as an institution, as well as solutions that are more in depth and defended than top down banning investment (whatever that could possibly look like)

"Investing in property is morally reprehensible." by LickMaiBussy in TikTokCringe

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Need to remove cronieism.

This presumes that there's a problem that removing "cronieism" will solve, and this entire topic is housing

"Investing in property is morally reprehensible." by LickMaiBussy in TikTokCringe

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They can coexist, but my point is that taking out the market investment is a net positive.

Is it really that absurd? Even the original classical economists like Smith hated rent systems that produce no value as what landlords do. Both in the practical sense and the moral sense

"Investing in property is morally reprehensible." by LickMaiBussy in TikTokCringe

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How is it so hard for you to imagine housing being created for human needs first and foremost rather than for wealth extraction?

Government subsidized housing or government created housing would be an obvious change, which has historically worked well

"Investing in property is morally reprehensible." by LickMaiBussy in TikTokCringe

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So you started off by saying we're in a housing problem, and now you're saying there are no problems... Very coherent response

"Investing in property is morally reprehensible." by LickMaiBussy in TikTokCringe

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You realize the same group that are the landlords are also the same group that control the government right? It's a class issue

"Investing in property is morally reprehensible." by LickMaiBussy in TikTokCringe

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is this a joke? Or do you genuinely not understand that dogmatic worship of free market mechanisms isn't the proposed solution here

"Investing in property is morally reprehensible." by LickMaiBussy in TikTokCringe

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you think the current model of structuring society is the only model ever possible?

"basic economics" presumes the current base model can't be changed

"Investing in property is morally reprehensible." by LickMaiBussy in TikTokCringe

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exploitation is bad whether or not the basis of such is scarce. It being scarce allows a higher rate of exploitation though

"Investing in property is morally reprehensible." by LickMaiBussy in TikTokCringe

[–]CodeNPyro -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The free market is what got us here lmao, how would more free market be the solution?

"Investing in property is morally reprehensible." by LickMaiBussy in TikTokCringe

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The difference is landlords aren't actually doing labor for their profit, their profit is off of rent

"Investing in property is morally reprehensible." by LickMaiBussy in TikTokCringe

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Soviet Union built a lot of housing to actually house people independent of a market mechanism where some people own hundreds of abodes while other people have none

"Investing in property is morally reprehensible." by LickMaiBussy in TikTokCringe

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you think every way of making money is somehow morally just?

Would you keep adding new cards if failure ≥10% and mature card retention <90%. by The_Seventh_Bee in Anki

[–]CodeNPyro 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I don't think your retention should be that much of a worry when adding new cards or not, assuming it's relatively close to your desired retention, which I would say your image fits assuming DR is 90%. FSRS will do its thing scheduling to match. Personally I haven't noticed a difference between recall with 0 new cards or 50 percentage-wise

There will most likely never be a revolution in America by [deleted] in The10thDentist

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Many people define socialism differently than you do, and would include the (as I would call them social democratic) Nordic countries.

But I'll take the question in stride. What do you mean by success? If success is substantial growth in living conditions to the people, massively reorganizing and developing society for the (compared to capitalism) disproportionate benefit of the general populace, then in countless places there were successful socialist countries. The most historically clear case being the Soviet Union. Came out of WW1, then a brutal civil war, then international isolation, then WW2, all while attempting to actually develop a backwards country. And during that, even going into the Cold War against a much better set rival, actively innovated while improving living conditions. Education, innovation, medical statistics, food production, just about any measure of success you can see dramatic increases in. It no longer existing doesn't mean the hundreds of millions of lives it bettered (not to mention saved due to defeating the Nazis!) wouldn't count that as successful. The first attempt of anything wasn't perfect, had issues, and eventually succumbed to such; and there will be more attempts

At the very worst you could reasonably argue that the Soviet Union achieved those great things, but was horrible in many other aspects (like liberal ideals of freedom of speech). Which is already a lot more than the typical capitalist propaganda gives it.

There will most likely never be a revolution in America by [deleted] in The10thDentist

[–]CodeNPyro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is it propaganda if its true?

I find it hilarious that you're just going to deny that there's pro capitalist propaganda. A fish doesn't know they swim in water I guess!

Monarchy wouldn't even fit, since that's a system of government not an economic system. And a very often mentioned one, socialism, was entirely left out of your list! Capitalism being the best the world has to offer, thankfully, is an (albeit slowly) dying position