Canada will change how it counts non-permanent residents, the main statistics agency said on Thursday, after an economist said the current methodology may have overlooked about a million foreign students, workers and others.

  • @rockstarmode@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    11 year ago

    Quality housing can’t be free. If there’s a cost, then someone is profiting. Whether that’s a corrupt government or whoever the landlord boogyman is you’re targeting, it doesn’t matter.

    I’m not parroting any “talking points” for corporate giants, you need to get out more. Popular culture and echo chambers like this one might have you beaten down and convinced there’s no way up, but that’s what they want you to believe. Hopeless drones are easier to control than thinking humans. If you take control of your life at least you can be responsible for the outcome.

    Personally even if I don’t succeed, I find the prospect of self determinism preferable to waiting for a benevolent government to miracle my way to a better life. Large government does not exist to serve the regular person, it will grind you beneath its feet as assuredly as any corporate entity.

    • @irmoz@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      1
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Quality housing can’t be free. If there’s a cost, then someone is profiting

      In a capitalist market yes. Not a nationalised one. Nationalised industries do not need to profit, only break even at most, and they can even run at a loss. No matter what thr cost is, it will be less than under private landlords who definitrly need to profit, and at an absurd rate, to cover their lifestyles.

      whoever the landlord boogyman is you’re targeti

      Are you… really gonna pretend you’ve never heard of landlords and don’t know what they are? How weird of you.

      I’m not parroting any “talking points” for corporate giants, you need to get out more.

      So, it’s just a coincidence you’re using the same arguments as them, eh?

      Popular culture and echo chambers like this one might have you beaten down and convinced there’s no way up, but that’s what they want you to believe.

      ?

      Question for you.

      When did I say there’s “no way up”?

      You are the one saying it’s impossible, not me. You are the one saying there’s no hope for change.

      Hopeless drones are easier to control than thinking humans.

      Yep, and that’s what I’m trying to change. When all you care about is getting enough money to survive, to pay off rent and bills, you’re right, you’re nothing but a hopeless drone. I’m trying to tell people there is hope - and you’re denying that, in fact, you’re even denying there’s a problem that needs to be fixed.

      If you take control of your life at least you can be responsible for the outcome.

      Yes, and as long as we’re under the thumb of landlords, we will never be fully in control.

      Personally even if I don’t succeed, I find the prospect of self determinism preferable to waiting for a benevolent government to miracle my way to a better life.

      This is exactly the type of propaganda i hear from landlords with 10 units. Strawmen paired with misleaning bootstrap rhetoric. “Even if i don’t succeed” 99 out of 100 times. The self determination to end up on the street. The implication that it would take a miracle.

      You self serving liar.

      You’re a fucking landlord, aren’t you?

      Large government does not exist to serve the regular person, it will grind you beneath its feet as assuredly as any corporate entity.

      No matter what else changes, one thing remains the same.

      Corporations need to make a profit. It is literally their only purpose. And they have all the power right now to dictate how they profit, whether it’s by helping us or fucking us over. The fiction of needing ro provide a decent product or a helpful service to profit well is far in the past.

      No government that didn’t give a shit would nationalise housing. It would cost too much and be only in the people’s benefit. The government would get absolutely nothing from it, other that pissing off all the billionaires and losing all their money.

      Oh wait. That’s losing something.

      That’s why they haven’t done it. That’s why it could only happen under a government that genuinely wants to and can work for the people.

      • @rockstarmode@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        Oh wow, thanks for putting so much thought into your replies! Aside from the couple times you’ve resorted to insults I’ve really enjoyed our back and forth conversation. It’s been a mostly good faith exchange.

        I know some Internet person isn’t going to change your closely held beliefs in a random thread, so I’m not going to try to do that. I also admit that many of my beliefs are inconsistent with most of what is to be found in places like this, so I don’t take it personally when I’m met with vehement disagreement.

        Nationalised industries do not need to profit

        What may have gone unnoticed is that I used the word “quality”. In my experience no quality good or service has ever been provided by a large entity (government, corporation, etc…) without profit motive. National parks in the US are close, but mostly because governmental benign neglect is as close to the natural state as we get, so doing very little is doing very little harm to a system that without human participation would be in equilibrium.

        Industries that do not have profit motive operate on altruism or largesse (sometimes both). Altruism cannot run high quality national scale entities, there just aren’t enough folks who reject profit while still doing their best work. Largesse can run small and large operations, but at national government scale they become so wasteful that delivering quality becomes impossible. This is where my comment about nationalized housing stock being equivalent to the projects came from.

        The mythical large government who cares about their people and delivers high quality services at scale has not, nor ever will, exist.

        Are you… really gonna pretend you’ve never heard of landlords

        No. But I also refuse to pretend that all landlords are evil by definition. I think PE funds and foreign nationals probably have motives which do not align with those of their renters, or the overall improvement of the quality of life in the US, so large scale ownership of domestic housing stock by entities like those poses issues, which I’ve already said we should address. But I have no problem with a small shop owning a handful of units, and seeking to make a profit.

        You’re a fucking landlord, aren’t you?

        Not unless you count me owning the home I live in as being my own landlord.

        it could only happen under a government that genuinely wants to and can work for the people.

        I think this situation is possible, but not at national scale.

        When did I say there’s “no way up”?

        When you implied individuals cannot succeed and instead must appeal to a higher power (national scale government) which has zero evidence that it has ever existed.

        You are the one saying it’s impossible, not me. You are the one saying there’s no hope for change.

        I’m saying that Internet echo chamber groupthink pushing for larger government is what will not work. There’s hope for change, but people have to be accountable to themselves first.

        I agree that we should prioritize quality of life for everyone, and we must take care of those who cannot take care of themselves. Doing those things requires large scale solutions, no doubt about it. It’s just doubtful that nationalizing the entire housing stock will achieve those ends.