• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why do conservatives value landlords and employers over families?

phattonez said:
I don't know what heritage you come from, but that's certainly not the Christian heritage.

St. John Chrysostom: "Not to enable the poor to share in our goods is to steal from them and deprive them of life. The goods we possess are not ours, but theirs."
Click to expand...

Well I am not a Christian and could not care less what St John says.

But tell me does it tell you somewhere in you bible that you are entitled to other people’s stuff.
 
braindrain said:
Well I am not a Christian and could not care less what St John says.

But tell me does it tell you somewhere in you bible that you are entitled to other people’s stuff.
Click to expand...
Read the parable of the rich man and Lazarus and tell me if you think Christ thought the rich had a responsibility to the poor.
 
phattonez said:
Landlords and housing prices aren't separate issues.
Click to expand...

They are in some respect different A person paying rent pays the owners mortgage, taxes, insurance and maintenance. The renter gains nothing. The owner may benefit if the rent pays all his expense and a bit more. The rental property owner also gets some tax relief on taxes and may reap more profit is the building is sold for more than they paid for it.

A person who purchases a home has to pay a mortgage, insurance and upkeep. The only profit the homeowners gets is when the homes sells for more than what they paid for it.
Even when a person owns the home, they have to pay the insurance, upkeep and taxes. The only profit that may occur is when the home is sold for more than what the owner paid for it.

So back to my favorite State. Why is the LA area so high both in rental and housing prices?. If your a homeowner who purchased years ago when the price was reasonable, bet your not complaining when you sell the house. :lamo
 
mike2810 said:
They are in some respect different A person paying rent pays the owners mortgage, taxes, insurance and maintenance. The renter gains nothing. The owner may benefit if the rent pays all his expense and a bit more. The rental property owner also gets some tax relief on taxes and may reap more profit is the building is sold for more than they paid for it.

A person who purchases a home has to pay a mortgage, insurance and upkeep. The only profit the homeowners gets is when the homes sells for more than what they paid for it.
Even when a person owns the home, they have to pay the insurance, upkeep and taxes. The only profit that may occur is when the home is sold for more than what the owner paid for it.

So back to my favorite State. Why is the LA area so high both in rental and housing prices?. If your a homeowner who purchased years ago when the price was reasonable, bet your not complaining when you sell the house. :lamo
Click to expand...
That's exactly the problem. Those who benefited from the price gains got theirs and now they don't care about the effects. Mammon has given them a gift, and they've neglected their Christian duty.
 
phattonez said:
If I find you dying of thirst in the desert, am I justified in charging you $500 for it? After all, it's my water.
Click to expand...

So, you are all for that wonderful free market that the conservatives pretend to want....until it affects you...
 
phattonez said:
That's exactly the problem. Those who benefited from the price gains got theirs and now they don't care about the effects. Mammon has given them a gift, and they've neglected their Christian duty.
Click to expand...

Why should they care? You don’t have to live there. The demand is what drive the prices up. If you don’t want to pay it, go elsewhere. What Christian duty?
 
phattonez said:
So when I find you dying in the desert I hope you have $500 to pay for my water or you're dying. Tough luck.
Click to expand...
If you find me in the desert, one of us will have the survival skills to make it out alive.

It wont be you.
 
If you are alone in the desert and there is no man with water, how much $ does it take to make that water appear?

There are people dying in the desert right now. But you are not taking them water. Why do you hate people dying in the desert?
 
Aberration said:
Why should they care? You don’t have to live there. The demand is what drive the prices up. If you don’t want to pay it, go elsewhere. What Christian duty?
Click to expand...
So rich people should have priority to live in a community over the people who built it over multiple generations?
 
VanceMack said:
If you find me in the desert, one of us will have the survival skills to make it out alive.

It wont be you.
Click to expand...
That's called a cop out. You don't want to answer the scenario because you don't like the consequences.
 
Aberration said:
If you are alone in the desert and there is no man with water, how much $ does it take to make that water appear?

There are people dying in the desert right now. But you are not taking them water. Why do you hate people dying in the desert?
Click to expand...
Lol, you can't just answer a simple scenario, can you?
 
phattonez said:
Especially when landlord profits average 5-15% per year without taking into account property value increases. It's a lucrative field, but families are getting crushed.

Further, wages aren't coming anywhere close to keeping up with the cost of living, not to mention productivity. Are you okay with average people finding it harder to start families and provide for them even though we're supposedly richer?

To what do you have higher loyalty? Obscure economic principles? Or families?

And especially Catholics, if you're not concerned about what's going on, you're directly contradicting Catholic social teaching.
6aabdb8e9be0d4939c1b0e9060dfad6e.jpg
Click to expand...

laws of supply vs demand.
if there is a large demand and a limited supply then prices will rise.
this is just basic economics.

there are other factors as well. Market forces dictate that the price is what people are willing to pay.
if i build an apartment complex and people are making 200k a year and they are willing to pay 3k a month
for rent then that is what i am going to charge.

if they are not willing to pay 3k then i have to lower my prices.
if you want to live in the big city where cost of living is hard to find then you are
going to pay the cost of living in the big city vs living an hour outside of the city
where it might be cheaper.
 
phattonez said:
If I find you dying of thirst in the desert, am I justified in charging you $500 for it? After all, it's my water.
Click to expand...

that is your choice. i am not going to stop you from charging it though, but it also means i don't have to buy it.
also it might mean i don't have 500 on me. your water is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it.
 
Mr Person said:
:lamo

Yeah vance, you conservatives and your "family values", which values say that it is a good thing to vote for then tell any lie to defend a serial sex criminal buddy with Epstein, who among other things bragged about walking in on minors in the changing room because he owned the pageant; an arch-bastard who cheated on every last wife he had, the only one sticking on for money despite his apparently horridly lack-luster humping of a porn star.






Family values.

Right.

:lamo
Click to expand...

i don't know any conservatives that defended epstein, but if you want to go that route clinton spent way more time on that plane
than trump did and there is no record that trump went to his little island unlike clinton. so you probably shouldn't be throwing stones.
 
WillyPete said:
There's always another renter. Basic Capitalism insists the rent must go as high as it possibly can, so long as it still rents.

And for the people priced out of their homes? **** them, they should have had more money. What are they, Communists?

It's the U.S.'s new motto in action: "**** you, I got mine."
Click to expand...

you seriously know nothing of capitalism do you?
i didn't think so by this response.
 
phattonez said:
That's exactly the problem. Those who benefited from the price gains got theirs and now they don't care about the effects. Mammon has given them a gift, and they've neglected their Christian duty.
Click to expand...

Maybe they are not Christian. :mrgreen:

Are you going to complain if you sell your house for more than what you paid for it?

I am starting to sense you are one of "we need to redistribute the wealth", as long it is not mine that gets redistributed.
 
WillyPete said:
There's always another renter. Basic Capitalism insists the rent must go as high as it possibly can, so long as it still rents.

And for the people priced out of their homes? **** them, they should have had more money. What are they, Communists?

It's the U.S.'s new motto in action: "**** you, I got mine."
Click to expand...

Reality strikes.

 
phattonez said:
Especially when landlord profits average 5-15% per year without taking into account property value increases. It's a lucrative field, but families are getting crushed.

Further, wages aren't coming anywhere close to keeping up with the cost of living, not to mention productivity. Are you okay with average people finding it harder to start families and provide for them even though we're supposedly richer?

To what do you have higher loyalty? Obscure economic principles? Or families?

And especially Catholics, if you're not concerned about what's going on, you're directly contradicting Catholic social teaching.
Click to expand...

It's not a Conservative or Democratic thing. It's the money. Ask Hollywood why they covete the Chinese billion consumers and conform their movies as to not cause waves. Ask why the NBA kowtow to Chinese displeasure. The NBA is beholden to the big shoe companies who produce and sell millions of shoes to the Chinese. Nike and Adidas control the NBA.
 
mike2810 said:
Maybe they are not Christian. :mrgreen:

Are you going to complain if you sell your house for more than what you paid for it?

I am starting to sense you are one of "we need to redistribute the wealth", as long it is not mine that gets redistributed.
Click to expand...
I don't think having the central government do everything is a good idea. I'm not a socialist. Subsidiarity is crucial. But local communities should be able to ensure that their residents can stay there rather than selling out the town to whatever rich investors want to buy.
 
ludin said:
that is your choice. i am not going to stop you from charging it though, but it also means i don't have to buy it.
also it might mean i don't have 500 on me. your water is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it.
Click to expand...
Lol, you're really going to die rather than betray this materialistic principle?

We both know what you'd do. You'd take that water from me, and you'd be justified in doing so.
 
ludin said:
laws of supply vs demand.
if there is a large demand and a limited supply then prices will rise.
this is just basic economics.

there are other factors as well. Market forces dictate that the price is what people are willing to pay.
if i build an apartment complex and people are making 200k a year and they are willing to pay 3k a month
for rent then that is what i am going to charge.

if they are not willing to pay 3k then i have to lower my prices.
if you want to live in the big city where cost of living is hard to find then you are
going to pay the cost of living in the big city vs living an hour outside of the city
where it might be cheaper.
Click to expand...
So tell me. Morally why does the landlord deserve that rent and property price appreciation which are due to market forces and not anything that he contributed? They say that there's no such thing as a free lunch. Those gains come at a price, and the result is working families not being able to live decently.
 
phattonez said:
Lol, you're really going to die rather than betray this materialistic principle?

We both know what you'd do. You'd take that water from me, and you'd be justified in doing so.
Click to expand...

this is what you don't get. if i don't have 500 then i can't pay it. even if i had 500 it isn't worth 500 to me.
you can only sell it for what someone is willing to pay. if i am your only customer then well i have some leverage over
what the price will be. you might get 100 out of me but no where does it say i have to pay you 500.
 
VanceMack said:
Your question is embarrassingly wrong. MANY families could survive on 1 income 50 years ago...and many required both parents to work. Today, MANY families survive on single income providers...and many require both parents to work.

You should really try studying history and not getting your economic education from leftist memes.
Click to expand...

My Dad worked 2 or more jobs most of his working life, and my Mother also worked at times, to provide the means necessary to provide our needs and some of our wants. I too, during my working life occasionally did some extra work to be able to acquire some wealth for our retirement years, and to have something to leave our children.

Wasn't our nation founded on certain unalienable Rights, among them Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?
 
phattonez said:
So rich people should have priority to live in a community over the people who built it over multiple generations?
Click to expand...

Everyone has reasons to value the things they do.
 
ludin said:
this is what you don't get. if i don't have 500 then i can't pay it. even if i had 500 it isn't worth 500 to me.
you can only sell it for what someone is willing to pay. if i am your only customer then well i have some leverage over
what the price will be. you might get 100 out of me but no where does it say i have to pay you 500.
Click to expand...
And you'd be fine with me taking $100 from you?

No you wouldn't. You don't want to answer honestly because you don't like the implications of the honest answer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom