• cacheson@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I think my favorite was the one that came in here hoping to get a rise out of us by saying “death to landlords”. I mean, definitely 3edgy5me, but otherwise yes, landlords bad? I feel like that sentiment could win a majority vote here.

    • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s so ridiculous because the majority of things they believe are nonoffensive or agreeable to the left broadly, but they are SO. GODDAMN. INSISTENT. on throating authoritarian cocks that they are absolutely intolerable as political allies.

      • Someonelol@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        This. They believe in a lot of the things we do but don’t want to believe their heroes are fucking monsters. Their unwavering support of the trans and gay communities is great, but Marx help you if you bring up the USSR and CCP didn’t take kindly to them. They could be allies to other leftists but end up being insufferable.

      • CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        10 months ago

        When even the capitalists can see that rentseeking is bad for the economy, I’m not sure why we have to fight over it all the time. Classic case of zealots not reading their own literature I guess.

        • 018118055@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Rent seeking in classical economics is about monopolists abusing their market position. I’m sure there are some monopolistic landlords but doubt it’s the average case.

          • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            10 months ago

            The rent of the land, therefore, considered as the price paid for the use of the land, is naturally a monopoly price. It is not at all proportioned to what the landlord may have laid out upon the improvement of the land, or to what he can afford to take; but to what the farmer can afford to give.

            I’m not sure even Adam Smith of all people agrees with you

            • 018118055@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              10 months ago

              Good quote thanks. I suppose he refers to the specific plot of land being rented. Still, I’m just telling what I learned in my economics a-level.

          • CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            10 months ago

            A monopoly is not necessary, just enough influence to affect policy. The biggest landlords are some of the most abusive and manipulative, and engage in much lobbying. Their collusion is part of why housing costs so much, and the government refusing to investigate it is due to their lobbying. Literal rentseeking lol, but yes I’m aware the word isn’t usually so straightforward.

            I like this definition:

            Rentseeking is an economic concept that occurs when an entity seeks to gain added wealth without any reciprocal contribution of productivity.