- Joined
- Jun 3, 2009
- Messages
- 30,870
- Reaction score
- 4,246
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Not a response. Should rich people get priority over those who built a community?Everyone has reasons to value the things they do.
Not a response. Should rich people get priority over those who built a community?Everyone has reasons to value the things they do.
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.
Not a response. Should rich people get priority over those who built a community?
Lol, you can't just answer a simple scenario, can you?
Those with more dollars are more equal, aren't they?They don’t have priority. Everyone dollar is equal.
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.
If i felt it was worth 100 bucks to get water then what is the problem? as long as i feel that it is an equal trade in value then it is worth it.
the problem with your man on an island scenario is that you put yourself at the forces of markets. you might have water at 500.
as the only person there to buy your water i don't have to pay it. i will pay what i am willing to pay. you obviously have costs to get that water
there. i have the option of waiting around for the person you have to pay to get what you need to get the water out of the ground.
i could take the more vicious route and just get rid of you and take the water and not pay anything (this is an option based on the scenario).
your scenario is a bust because you don't consider all variables or implications.
Those with more dollars are more equal, aren't they?
And if it was one of the Koch brothers or Trump needing the water, the post would likely be claiming the price was too low.
A seller is justified in setting a price to whatever he/she wishes. A prospective buyer can then accept, decline, or try to bargain for a lower price. If declined, the seller is then faced with having to seek and find another prospective buyer to deal with and if he has to consume the water in his search he may then be put in the position of seeking someone with water to sell.
If you find home prices/rents too high, widen your search area until you find one within your means to purchase/rent.
don't project it is a fallacy not an argument.
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.
What's the difference between this and the water bottle example? You said the water bottle scenario was morally repugnant. What's different that makes this okay?
you seriously know nothing of capitalism do you?
i didn't think so by this response.
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.
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.
Reality strikes.
And my chart shows that wages have grown in recent years, but that growth is minuscule relative to 50 years of decreases, especially since the housing costs have risen much more than inflation.
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.
Again why should I care what the Bible says.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.
Because it's true and you'll be held responsible for rejecting it at the judgment.Again why should I care what the Bible says.
It depends on what's reasonable and what I'm doing with the money. Is the rise due mostly to inflation, and am I raising my children with the money? Then it's fine. Is the rise due purely to market conditions and I'm spending the money on lavish vacations? Then it's wrong.You avoided the main question of "Are you going to complain if you sell your house for more than what you paid for it?"
Let me put a different way. A average wage earner bought a house 25 years ago for $70,000. The homeowner decides to retire, sell the home and move. The house sold for $200,000. Is that ok with you?
You’re kidding right. You cannot seriously believe that the two are related.
How’s this for one huge difference. If I don’t rent to you you have 10,000,000 other people to choose from. You will not die simply because I don’t rent you my house.
How far would you take this stupidity? I have a 4br house. All but one of my kids have moved out so I have two empty bedrooms. Should I be forced to rent you one to give you a place to sleep?
What about them? They're the party of radical individualism. I'm not surprised by their immoral business practices.Uh.....
What about all the liberal landlords charging obscene rent?
Uh no....