Why do conservatives value landlords and employers over families?

marke said:

I don't know about others but I am conservative and I value both humans and free market business.

Click to expand...

Therefore what?

cpwill said:

Well, Chrysotom wasn't cited, which is why I didn't respond to him. In the quote you are citing here, however (assuming you are citing it accurately, and using it as he intended), he was incorrect both theologically and economically.

1. Theologically, all wealth belongs to God.
2. Economically, wealth belongs to those who have legal control over it's apportionment.

The Bible does, however, have things to say about envying your neighbors' wealth and using violence or the threat of violence to take it from him. Only Ten Commandments in the list, and two of them deal with that.



Stealing from others because you want something you cannot afford, or because you want something but aren't willing to pay full price for it, is no more in alignment with Christian morality than the envy and bitterness against those wealthier than you that spawns attempts to justify it.

Scripture says we are to pay to all what is owed them, and describes as "wicked" those who take something agreeing to pay, and then do not.


And now I will wait (fruitlessly, likely) for you to actually manage to address the post you quoted and then ignored. I'd bet a nickel you won't, but will instead attempt to spin this into an argument from this post. But, in case you need reminding of the theme:

Look, man. If you don't like how much you are paying in rent, well, when your contract is up, move. If you are unwilling to move for other reasons, related to location, career, etc., then accept that you are prioritizing those things over how much you wish to pay in rent, and that therefore the amount you are paying is the result of no one's choice but your own.​

Click to expand...

Lol, you call Chrysostom wrong and then you side with the rich man over Lazarus. I guess Lazarus was just envious of the rich man's wealth, and Jesus was wrong to say that the rich man went to eternal damnation, right?

phattonez said:

Lol, you call Chrysostom wrong and then you side with the rich man over Lazarus. I guess Lazarus was just envious of the rich man's wealth, and Jesus was wrong to say that the rich man went to eternal damnation, right?

Click to expand...

I called Chrysotom wrong because he was wrong, and said nothing about Lazarus or the rich man. I cited scripture for you which you ignored, but correctly predicted that you would ignore the post you claimed you would respond to if I responded to Chrysotom.

What does Scripture say about pledging to do something (say, to respond to a post if someone responds to a quote from Chrysotom) and then failing to do so?

phattonez said:

Maybe I'm demanding $500 for my child's cancer surgery. Does that make it okay?

Click to expand...

If someone else is willing to pay yes that’s okay.

But again renting an apartment isn’t a life and death business so you cannotapply life and death morality to it.

cpwill said:

I called Chrysotom wrong because he was wrong, and said nothing about Lazarus or the rich man. I cited scripture for you which you ignored, but correctly predicted that you would ignore the post you claimed you would respond to if I responded to Chrysotom.

What does Scripture say about pledging to do something (say, to respond to a post if someone responds to a quote from Chrysotom) and then failing to do so?

Click to expand...

I'm struck by the fact that you think you know better than Chrysostom and you ignore the parable. I understand the command against envy, but you seem to think that poor working people wanting necessities is envy while the rich showing no concern for the poor is just fine.

Do you really think it's morally just to take profit while your tenants are paying 50% of their income for basic accommodation? Upon whom do you think God will cast judgment? The poor man for wanting cheaper rent, or the rich man for demanding as much profit as he can get?

Gaius46 said:

If someone else is willing to pay yes that’s okay.

But again renting an apartment isn’t a life and death business so you cannotapply life and death morality to it.

Click to expand...

Housing isn't a necessity? That's news to me.

phattonez said:

Absolutely wrong. Televisions, computers, and other toys have become much cheaper. Only necessities are increasing in price.

Click to expand...

And you think it is some kind of conspiracy? I never said every single item goes up in price. Most things, in general do. You are posting in the wrong forum. CT is further down.

cpwill said:

Life in the U.S. is wonderful for many reasons, not least of which is that it offers you choices. But saying yes to some things means saying no to others - marrying Susy means you are no longer able to marry Sarah. Becoming a lawyer likely means giving up on your dreams of becoming an NFL player. Choosing to live in an expensive area means you don't get the lower cost of living of a less expensive area.

Click to expand...

I'm curious what choice you think the poor have, when they lack the resources to move (which is always expensive however you cut it), but also lack the resources to pay rising costs of rent. Is the choice to go live under a bridge because you were essentially forced to do so really a choice? To take a less extreme example, is the choice to pay an extra $100 a month in rent (thereby foregoing, say, medical care or car repairs) because your landlord just raised the rent, and you lack the money to move, really a choice?

It doesn't seem so to me. In the first instance, your choice is what? You cannot pay rent. You cannot move. Your forced choice is to become homeless, as so many do. In the second instance, again, your choice is what? You cannot move. You have to pay the higher rent, and watch your health or your prospects for mobility worsen.

How in the world is any of that really a choice? The simple fact is that people are pushed into economic hardship all the time in this country, and the notion that they choose to do so in all, or even a moderate number, of such cases, is just absurd. It's out of touch with the reality these individuals live.

I've never been a landlord, but I have been an employer, and looking at things from that perspective, I can tell you that literally none (and I mean literally not a single one) of the 2000+ people I employed over the years had any real choice in working for me, or someone else, because we all tended to make certain that wages and conditions were going to be the same--and inadequate--wherever they went. Why inadequate? In what way? The point was to figure out how to fix pay scales so that employees would be forced to take on debt to survive, and would hence be scared to leave their jobs. You can treat a scared employee like a slave, and that's what I and my fellow elites wanted. And we were quite happy that people such as yourself spread the good word, so to speak.

I imagine the economics of being a landlord differ somewhat, but not by much.

Moderate Right said:

And you think it is some kind of conspiracy? I never said every single item goes up in price. Most things, in general do. You are posting in the wrong forum. CT is further down.

Click to expand...

Most things get cheaper. Only necessities have gotten more expensive.

And don't be fooled by the housing number. That shows owner's equivalent rent rather than actual prices.

ashurbanipal said:

I've never been a landlord, but I have been an employer, and looking at things from that perspective, I can tell you that literally none (and I mean literally not a single one) of the 2000+ people I employed over the years had any real choice in working for me, or someone else, because we all tended to make certain that wages and conditions were going to be the same--and inadequate--wherever they went. Why inadequate? In what way? The point was to figure out how to fix pay scales so that employees would be forced to take on debt to survive, and would hence be scared to leave their jobs. You can treat a scared employee like a slave, and that's what I and my fellow elites wanted. And we were quite happy that people such as yourself spread the good word, so to speak.

I imagine the economics of being a landlord differ somewhat, but not by much.

Click to expand...

That's wild, but not at all unbelievable. What caused you to have a change of heart?

phattonez said:

Most things get cheaper. Only necessities have gotten more expensive.

And don't be fooled by the housing number. That shows owner's equivalent rent rather than actual prices.

Click to expand...

I don't accept cherry picked graphs. And, you're already disputing your own graph so why should I accept the rest?

Moderate Right said:

I don't accept cherry picked graphs. And, you're already disputing your own graph so why should I accept the rest?

Click to expand...

Lol, you're reminding me why I don't typically engage you.

phattonez said:

That's wild, but not at all unbelievable. What caused you to have a change of heart?

Click to expand...

Almost everyone I tell about my experience usually says something like "that's pretty weird." Most people really just do not understand wealth, the wealthy, or what the wealthy do (and to be fair, I should point out that not every one of the wealthy take unfair advantage).

I was never very easy with it, but went along because I had drunk the unfettered-capitalism kool aid. I told myself that though I was treating others unfairly, ultimately it was for the good of the economy, and everyone is lifted by a rising tide. After 16 years of doing it, though, what I saw, and what I was forced to admit to myself, is that this view is just horse sh*t. I was rising, and others in my social circle (all of whom made $1m or more per year) were rising. Everyone else was sinking, and I realized that I was a direct cause of that problem.

Additionally, I was pursuing training in mysticism, and had a number of profound experiences that showed me that there is a moral order to the universe, and that order supersedes all others in importance. We are each responsible to great degree for each other. We are responsible to be fair, just, and honest in our dealings with each other. Once I saw these things, I could no longer continue with what I was doing. I left the corporate world and went into academia.

HumblePi said:

You have a president in power. Email or Tweet him and ask him to stop lining his pockets with money from Ukraine and Russia and do something about those homeless people you're bitching about.

Click to expand...

It's amazing blaming the poor and homeless for having nowhere to **** and piss, yet cons have no solutions except to bitch and moan about them. If they don't want them in cities, are they suggesting they pay a tax to have them shipped out and spread evenly over our rural areas?

Maybe ship them out to interment camps to keep them out of sight and out of mind? They don't want rent control, they don't want to pay for any training or education. How many reactionaries volunteer serving meals in a homeless shelter? What percentage of their income do Repubs donate to local nonprofit organizations serving the homeless, hungry, and abused? Do they offer to help provide our addicts and mentally ill with treatment they obviously can't afford?!?

Oh and btw, Americans don't deserve a minimum wage...

ashurbanipal said:

Almost everyone I tell about my experience usually says something like "that's pretty weird." Most people really just do not understand wealth, the wealthy, or what the wealthy do (and to be fair, I should point out that not every one of the wealthy take unfair advantage).

I was never very easy with it, but went along because I had drunk the unfettered-capitalism kool aid. I told myself that though I was treating others unfairly, ultimately it was for the good of the economy, and everyone is lifted by a rising tide. After 16 years of doing it, though, what I saw, and what I was forced to admit to myself, is that this view is just horse sh*t. I was rising, and others in my social circle (all of whom made $1m or more per year) were rising. Everyone else was sinking, and I realized that I was a direct cause of that problem.

Additionally, I was pursuing training in mysticism, and had a number of profound experiences that showed me that there is a moral order to the universe, and that order supersedes all others in importance. We are each responsible to great degree for each other. We are responsible to be fair, just, and honest in our dealings with each other. Once I saw these things, I could no longer continue with what I was doing. I left the corporate world and went into academia.

Click to expand...

We could talk for hours about logos.

SoCal said:

It's amazing blaming the poor and homeless for having nowhere to **** and piss, yet cons have no solutions except to bitch and moan about them. If they don't want them in cities, are they suggesting they pay a tax to have them shipped out and spread evenly over our rural areas?

Maybe ship them out to interment camps to keep them out of sight and out of mind? They don't want rent control, they don't want to pay for any training or education. How many reactionaries volunteer serving meals in a homeless shelter? What percentage of their income do Repubs donate to local nonprofit organizations serving the homeless, hungry, and abused? Do they offer to help provide our addicts and mentally ill with treatment they obviously can't afford?!?

Oh and btw, Americans don't deserve a minimum wage...

Click to expand...

But don't Dems hold absolute and long time control over many of the largest cities with the worst homeless populations: New York, Baltimore, Detroit, San Francisco, Los Angeles? And what have been their successes? Yet you point out "cons"? Oh, and Americans deserve a wage commensurate to value they contribute to the employer.

phattonez said:

I'm struck by the fact that you think you know better than Chrysostom and you ignore the parable. I understand the command against envy, but you seem to think that poor working people wanting necessities is envy while the rich showing no concern for the poor is just fine.

Do you really think it's morally just to take profit while your tenants are paying 50% of their income for basic accommodation? Upon whom do you think God will cast judgment? The poor man for wanting cheaper rent, or the rich man for demanding as much profit as he can get?

Click to expand...

If there was no profit in providing housing would there be any?

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Eriech said:

If there was no profit in providing housing would there be any?

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

TBH, this feels more like, "I want to buy a house and cannot afford it, so I will blame somebody else" thread.

SoCal said:

It's amazing blaming the poor and homeless for having nowhere to **** and piss, yet cons have no solutions except to bitch and moan about them. If they don't want them in cities, are they suggesting they pay a tax to have them shipped out and spread evenly over our rural areas?

Maybe ship them out to interment camps to keep them out of sight and out of mind? They don't want rent control, they don't want to pay for any training or education. How many reactionaries volunteer serving meals in a homeless shelter? What percentage of their income do Repubs donate to local nonprofit organizations serving the homeless, hungry, and abused? Do they offer to help provide our addicts and mentally ill with treatment they obviously can't afford?!?

Oh and btw, Americans don't deserve a minimum wage...

Click to expand...

Let me disabuse you of that, SoCal. Here are my solutions, at least as far as California's housing crisis is concerned:

1. The California government should work hand in hand with the Federal government to strictly enforce our immigration laws. California alone is home to approximately 2.2 million illegal immigrants who are taking up housing that could otherwise go to legal residents and citizens of California, which drive up our housing costs. Landlords should use E-Verify just as employers should to ensure that people they rent to are here legally.
2. Lower the regulatory burdens when it comes to building new single-family homes, duplexes and apartments in California.*
3. Bring back and taxpayer-funded state mental health facilities to care for the many insane people who live on our streets.

*I suspect that many of these regulations were pushed to be put in place by vested interests of major landowners who wanted to ensure that their property values would continue remain high.

Bullseye said:

But don't Dems hold absolute and long time control over many of the largest cities with the worst homeless populations: New York, Baltimore, Detroit, San Francisco, Los Angeles? And what have been their successes? Yet you point out "cons"? Oh, and Americans deserve a wage commensurate to value they contribute to the employer.

Click to expand...

Ah, the good old "Mayors have far more influence on macroeconomics than ANYONE!"

You wore out that trope a long time ago, bulls.

phattonez said:

Lol, you're reminding me why I don't typically engage you.

Click to expand...

You disputed your own graph and yet you want me to accept it.

Luckyone said:

In a family not everyone is an earner. The mother may be taking care of the home, the daughters may be looking to get married and may not be working, the sons are in school being educated. One of the family members may be a drug addict and not working at all even though capable of working. Your post suggests that if the man who is the earner should not share his income with the others simply because he earned it himself and the others didn't?

Sharing the wealth among the family is what all individual families do. Why should it be different with our American family (the entire United States)?

Click to expand...

Using your analogy the earner has to take care of his family and the families of his neighbors too.
Wealth is not evil. We need to work to make wealth creation easier not harder. A safety net is in society's interest; a hammock is not.
Wonder how much of each of your work day should go to other families before your own. 2 hours? 3 hours? 4 hours? more?

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Bullseye said:

But don't Dems hold absolute and long time control over many of the largest cities with the worst homeless populations: New York, Baltimore, Detroit, San Francisco, Los Angeles? And what have been their successes? Yet you point out "cons"? Oh, and Americans deserve a wage commensurate to value they contribute to the employer.

Click to expand...

Good points about the cities.

And no, they have more responsibility than that. A father has a responsibility to his children even though they don't produce wealth. This idea that we have no responsibility to each other is unnatural. It's love of mammon.

Eriech said:

If there was no profit in providing housing would there be any?

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Home builders make plenty of profit. And we have more housing today per capita than in 2000, yet profits have been increasing. How does that make sense?

Drawdown said:

TBH, this feels more like, "I want to buy a house and cannot afford it, so I will blame somebody else" thread.

Click to expand...

Imagine people wanting necessities to be affordable! How absurd!