Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Spoken like somebody who has clearly never owned property, rented homes, or built anything, or risked money to build a business. You are so, so far off here. Landlords only hold "all the power" if we constrict housing. That is a policy problem, not "evil landlords". Read up!


Hilarious assumptions

Please just do a smidgen of research


As a operator in the space, I assure you I have. :)


I think your tone was why you got downvoted.

You're mostly right though, so long as housing is consistently treated as an investment rather than a commodity produced and sold in bulk, landlords hold all of the power.


Who are you agreeing with because that was precicely the opposite of what the person you responded to was suggesting.


I think there is a disagreement in what commodity means.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/commodity

People who criticize the commodification of housing I think tend to believe the correct and valid definition is:

(2) something useful or valued.

or

(5) one that is subject to ready exchange or exploitation within a market. (emphasis added)

I tend to focus on:

(1c) a mass-produced unspecialized product.

or

(4) a good or service whose wide availability typically leads to smaller profit margins and diminishes the importance of factors (such as brand name) other than price.

Housing was commodified after WWII, when we stamped out so much housing, it was cheap and available to everyone. When housing is that available, it removes much of the power of landlords to distort the market.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: