• faythofdragons@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Part of the problem, I think, is that in common vernacular, ‘landlord’ also applies to people that are renting out a room of their personal house. The pro-landlord propaganda likes to hold them up as the gold standard we’re attacking.

    We need to be clear that we’re absolutely not talking about the couple that’s renting out their kid’s old room to get through tough times. They’re also victims of the same system, being forced to sacrifice personal property at the altar of capitalism.

    • AES_Enjoyer@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Marx is clear about this, BTW. The distinction between private property (i.e. capital) and personal property, is that personal property is owned for its use value (you own a trenchcoat to protect yourself from the cold, or you own a house to live in it), whereas private property is owned for its monetary revalorization capability (you own a trenchcoat to rent it in a costumes store, you own a house to rent it to someone else). The same object can be used for its use value, and then it’s it’s personal property; or it can be used in the capital revalorization cycle, and then it’s private property.

    • JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Or even honestly, the middle aged couple that was able to upgrade houses without selling, and lets their old house to a young couple for a reasonable rate because it’s paid off. Which, in my rural experience, is really common. I am very grateful to a man that I didn’t and still don’t particularly like, because he rented me a nice property for a very fair rate. I could say similar things about other past landlords. The difference is when it’s not an investment, but a business. Treating housing like a business interaction cheapens human life, and I have lived in that situation as well, to varying degrees. The worst was an apartment in Park City UT that was owned by some yuppies in Massachusetts, part of some sheisty lease/timeshare property LLC, where the building super was just a power tripping asshole with no accountability. I’m rambling, but Landlord Bad is too simple for a complex situation.

      • faythofdragons@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Or like if somebody inherits a house while they already have one, and decide to rent it out, that’s fine too.

        The private vs personal is introducing vocab to make a difference between ‘walmart is private property’ and ‘my house is private property’. We’re proposing that it’s ‘walmart is private property’ and ‘my house is personal property’.

        • jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          59 minutes ago

          ao, should people that live on large lots of residential commercial multi use zoning not be able to build a department store on the same property as their house?

    • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      16 hours ago

      We’re talking about a very minor amount of priviledged people who have the spare property to rent. Even a room. Most impoverished people live in apartments. We do not own them, none of the income taken from us for rent is returned to us (unlike property ownership via a mortgage in which case value is literally returned to you), and we are only able to roomshare or sublet. Neither of which is what youre describing.

      Not dismissing that middle class property owning families cant fall on hard times and have to fight to maintain the class position they occupy, just pointing out that the majority of us would do anything to have a home with a spare room to rent out. Thats a dream that many many people in my generation will never come close to achieving.

      We shouldn’t have to appeal to the class anxieties of middle class people. The fact that we suffer is a rallying cause enough. There are enough poor people to tear the system down if we all worked together. Its appealing to our shared suffering. Class consciousness and solidarity. Its recognizing our collective struggle and fighting back against power. It doesn’t happen by making concessions to land owners. The threat of having to downsize is nothing compared with the threat of being homeless if you have to go to the hospital. The threat of losing everything if you get an injury. The impoverished and the marginalized live with guns aimed at every one of their vital organs. From birth to death under duress at the hands of the state. I dont really give a fuck what land owners are going through. We’d kill to have to downsize.

      • faythofdragons@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        14 hours ago

        We’re talking about a very minor amount of priviledged people who have the spare property to rent.

        Proceeds to rant about them for multiple paragraphs without mentioning the corporations that own entire subdivisions of apartment complexes.

        Nice aim.