It is currently Mon Feb 17, 2020 1:36 am

All times are UTC+01:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Feb 14, 2020 5:44 pm 
Offline
Holyman
Holyman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:00 pm
Posts: 17777
Location: Earth
Hey tG. You said a whole lot there, and I wouldn’t normally break things down quote-by-quote for you – that’s a special treat I try to reserve for a specific section of our Community.

But after I tried to address your pertinent points more broadly, and failed: I figured best to do the Q-by-/Q bit. So apologies in advance.

tgrant wrote:
People want homes. There are only so many.


So I’d say:

People *NEED* homes: why are there only so many?

tgrant wrote:
People have unique wants and they buy homes that fit these wants. Just like you and I both did.


I have never bought any residential property.

It’s the single-biggest confidence trick pulled on the largest number of people. It’s a game specifically rigged to keep people anchored to a particular form of Society (which isn’t working out very well for anyone anymore…).

But your key point is that there are a limited number of homes because people “have unique wants”.

I disagree: I would say just about the single most ubiquitous want in any human’s Life is to have a home.

But you mean they have desires for different types of homes.

I disagree with that, because it only applies to people who build their homes from scratch, rather than buying the nearest approximation to their “Dream Home” they can find and afford.

In my Experience, most people never buy the home they want: they buy the home they can try and make into the home they want… With all the attendant aggravation that requires.

tgrant wrote:
Are you proposing free housing for all?


No.

I’m proposing free housing for anyone who can’t afford to buy their own home.

tgrant wrote:
We have lots of free housing...but that doesn't solve the problem and the way most cities do it probably make things much worse.


Agreed.

And that’s mostly because of some faux-fear of “Moral Hazard”.

And also because: cities.

tgrant wrote:
I mean...sure...you could give them the keys to your house. The home won't raise them out of the bottom 20% because not having a home isn't what keeps them in the predicament of not having a home.


I wouldn’t be trying to raise them out the bottom quintile:

I’d be trying to give a homeless person a home.

Someone’s got to be in the bottom 20%.

And I have to say, I’m as familiar and friendly with people in the bottom 20% of London Society as I am with the top 20%. The only principle difference I could attest to generally, is that those in the bottom 20% don’t spend as much time judging those in the top 20%, as those in the highest quintile judge downwards.

If someone doesn’t want to spend their Life working, doing something they don’t want to do – have to be paid to do – why should they?

The assumption that those in the bottom 20% aren’t happy and content being in the bottom 20%, is mostly down to those in the top 20% trying to justify why they make Life so difficult for the bottom 20%.

Most of the B-20's I know: wouldn't trade the Freedom they have in their lives, for a high-paying, high-pressured, pay-all-your-bills-on-time Life, if it came with a large farmhouse in the Chilterns.

They'd just like to continue living the kind of simple, trouble-free Life they enjoyed as Children.

:-??

_________________
Image

"We are moving into an era where authority cannot be the Truth.

Only the Truth shall be the Authority in coming times, as the sanctity of all authorities will be questioned."
- Sadhguru


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Feb 14, 2020 6:17 pm 
Offline
Holyman
Holyman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:00 pm
Posts: 17777
Location: Earth
I should add anecdotally:

I spent the first 15 years of my life living in what were called "council houses". First 12 years on a new-build estate; next 3 on an old-build estate.

Then I stopped living in a council house because Margaret Thatcher's Government instituted a policy that meant my father - a fireman, with alimony to pay for my two half-siblings - could buy the home for £19,000.

That was in 1986.

I actually moved out of that home in '92, so technically I was still living in the same place, but it was no no-longer "social housing".

I grew up in and amongst the "Bottom 20%" because my father, on his second marriage with three kids, and a fireman's income, couldn't afford to get on the property ladder. 13 years after he bought the place, in 1999, he sold it for £129,000.

Six years later, those he sold it to sold it on for £450,000.

And I believe its market-price today is somewhere around £500,000.

For a shitty, end-of-terrace, 3 bedroom, old-build council house with an outdoor (and an indoor) bathroom.

The issue with residential homes being traded as financial commodities does not just affect the bottom 20%.

And I'd further add:

You can take the Boy out of the Bottom 20%; but you can't take the Bottom 20% out of the Boy.

B-)

_________________
Image

"We are moving into an era where authority cannot be the Truth.

Only the Truth shall be the Authority in coming times, as the sanctity of all authorities will be questioned."
- Sadhguru


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Feb 14, 2020 7:01 pm 
Offline
Holyman
Holyman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:00 pm
Posts: 17777
Location: Earth
Further anecdotal evidence:

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertain ... t-21493613

:-"

_________________
Image

"We are moving into an era where authority cannot be the Truth.

Only the Truth shall be the Authority in coming times, as the sanctity of all authorities will be questioned."
- Sadhguru


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:07 pm 
Offline
Sergeant-Major
Sergeant-Major
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 13, 2004 12:00 pm
Posts: 7281
Location: Close to where I want to be
Holyman wrote:
Hey tG. You said a whole lot there, and I wouldn’t normally break things down quote-by-quote for you – that’s a special treat I try to reserve for a specific section of our Community.


Honored! Back at ya...


Holyman wrote:
People *NEED* homes: why are there only so many?


Obvious. Space. Not enough where people want to live.



Holyman wrote:
I have never bought any residential property.


I know you haven't but you live in one. So when you decided to live in one you looked at all the considerations and picked one...and probably one of the big considerations was...wait for it....

Holyman wrote:


But your key point is that there are a limited number of homes because people “have unique wants”.

I disagree: I would say just about the single most ubiquitous want in any human’s Life is to have a home.

But you mean they have desires for different types of homes.

I disagree with that, because it only applies to people who build their homes from scratch, rather than buying the nearest approximation to their “Dream Home” they can find and afford.

In my Experience, most people never buy the home they want: they buy the home they can try and make into the home they want… With all the attendant aggravation that requires.



No.

What are the three biggest drivers for realestate Holyman? You know this...Location ... Location ... Location. ...and then maybe sqft.

Where are you going to put these free homes? Spread them in the community? ...good luck with that. Put them all together? good luck with that. Both have challenges that are too numerous to write up...but people far smarter than you or I have been giving their lives up trying to solve them...and it's really really hard. It's not as simple as "homes are a financial commodity". It's a fucking really hard problem to solve (I put the "fucking" in because Mullet said it makes me sound smart when I swear...or that I think it makes me sounds smart...probably the latter...fuck you Mullet).


Holyman wrote:
I’m proposing free housing for anyone who can’t afford to buy their own home.


Again...Where are you going to put them? How big are they? Are they all the same? Luck of the draw who gets the beach front free home? Does everyone get a certain amount of subsidized sqft? First 1000 sqft free? What about maintenance? Any trip into a subsidized housing complex and you see people there are not doing a good job of maintaining their community...even when the homes are free.

Holyman wrote:
They'd just like to continue living the kind of simple, trouble-free Life they enjoyed as Children.

:-??



...and that's the problem. I don't want perpetual children. My goal is to turn children into competent adults. If we can't do that everything crumbles. Sad reality is some people can't, for reasons outside their control, become competent adults. We want to help them....like Barca taking care of his brother, it's noble to do that. Those adults who chose to not grow up... That's fine to. ...they don't need my help. ...If we subsidize peoples perpetual childhood who would want to grow up?

_________________
What you have taken, Has been from here
What you gave has been given here
What belongs to you today
belonged to someone yesterday
and will be someone else’s tomorrow

Change is the Law of The Universe

-------------------------------------------------

“A good traveler has no fixed plans, and is not intent on arriving.” – Lao Tzu


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Feb 14, 2020 9:20 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant-Colonel
Lieutenant-Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 3:40 pm
Posts: 17780
San Francisco, Vancouver, Los Angeles and San Diego are some of the most expensive places in the world to live because it is beautiful and has nice weather. They are also run by very Liberal politicians who put up alot of zoning and environmental restrictions making building new housing very difficult and expensive.

Not everyone is entitled to live in a house or a rental in the most desirable and expensive places on the planet. So some people might consider moving back east where the cost of living is much cheaper to get off the streets.

If these 4 cities reduced the regulations for new housing and stopped their foolishly permissive drug policies - it would put a massive dent in the homeless camps very quickly.


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Feb 14, 2020 9:43 pm 
Offline
Major General
Major General
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 12:00 pm
Posts: 34781
We should get together, identify an island and ship all the homeless to it. It'll be the new Australia, but for druggies and mentally unwell. The strongest will thrive and make a success of the place. Job done.

_________________
Norks


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Feb 14, 2020 10:05 pm 
Offline
Holyman
Holyman
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:00 pm
Posts: 17777
Location: Earth
tgrant wrote:
Holyman wrote:
I’m proposing free housing for anyone who can’t afford to buy their own home.


Again...Where are you going to put them? How big are they? Are they all the same? Luck of the draw who gets the beach front free home? Does everyone get a certain amount of subsidized sqft? First 1000 sqft free? What about maintenance? Any trip into a subsidized housing complex and you see people there are not doing a good job of maintaining their community...even when the homes are free.


Because they are there under sufferance.

Those "homes" are not given to them as a mark of care and consideration by an Enlightened and Evolved Society; they are poorly maintained shit-holes where Society parks those it resents for not towing the line everyone else is mug enough to do.

But fundamentally, what you are asking is:

Who will pay for it all.

But I'm allowing that you probably know you don't want to be asking *ME* that question. ;)

tgrant wrote:
Holyman wrote:
They'd just like to continue living the kind of simple, trouble-free Life they enjoyed as Children.


...and that's the problem. I don't want perpetual children. My goal is to turn children into competent adults. If we can't do that everything crumbles. Sad reality is some people can't, for reasons outside their control, become competent adults. We want to help them....like Barca taking care of his brother, it's noble to do that. Those adults who chose to not grow up... That's fine to. ...they don't need my help. ...If we subsidize peoples perpetual childhood who would want to grow up?


Can I presume to assert that the reason your goal is to turn children into competent adults, is because the Adult World requires a great deal of competency in which to thrive and survive.

None of the lower three quintiles are much fun these days. If you're living a "comfortable" existence, then you're in the 80-100% bracket, for now. And Life deteriorates quite rapidly as you go down the metrics from there.

So as Responsible Parents we must think, "Fuck! Got to make sure my kids don't end up on the streets, or worse..!".

Because...

All the so-called "competent adults" that are going before those incompetent children, have created and maintained a Dog-Eat-Dog Society.

Of which they are inexplicably proud, and understandably keen to ensure that their own dogs don't get eaten when it's Time to fend for themselves.

Facts of the matter are that we possess more than adequate technical understanding to ensure that every human being alive on this Planet can live a comfortable Existence.

But politics, morality and our forced addiction to money prevents that happening.

Forcing our kids to grow rapidly into "adults" that can join a Rat-Race that is observably not producing Good Outcomes, seems both foolish and cruel.

We as adults are starting to wake-up to the nightmare of our addiction to money.

We should wake up to the fact that trying to integrate our Children into Capitalism, as our first and foremost priority as Parents, is not something they are going to put up with any more.

:-??

_________________
Image

"We are moving into an era where authority cannot be the Truth.

Only the Truth shall be the Authority in coming times, as the sanctity of all authorities will be questioned."
- Sadhguru


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2020 12:20 am 
Offline
Sergeant-Major
Sergeant-Major
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 13, 2004 12:00 pm
Posts: 7281
Location: Close to where I want to be
Holyman wrote:
Because they are there under sufferance.

Those "homes" are not given to them as a mark of care and consideration by an Enlightened and Evolved Society; they are poorly maintained shit-holes where Society parks those it resents for not towing the line everyone else is mug enough to do.

But fundamentally, what you are asking is:

Who will pay for it all.

But I'm allowing that you probably know you don't want to be asking *ME* that question. ;)


Not what I was asking or caring about. You pay for your homeless problem one way or another. I was coming from the angle of giving people a house has been tried. It alone doesn't work. If you move the bottom 20% into the communities it causes problems. If you put them in one place it causes problems. I don't see just giving people a home as solving the problem at all. We've been trying it. Doesn't work. Even if you give them the land and the home and they own it outright because you're enlightened and love all your fellow man... They don't have the ability to maintain it. Do you send them to home maintenance school? For most the home will be in a state of disrepair in a matter of a decade...if you're lucky.

Holyman wrote:

Can I presume to assert that the reason your goal is to turn children into competent adults, is because the Adult World requires a great deal of competency in which to thrive and survive.


Partly. But mainly because being a parent requires competence. How are they going to raise the generation that comes after them if they are incompetent? I also want them to improve things. Our parents made the world a much much better place than they inherited from their parents. We have continued along those lines. Our kids need to do the same after we are gone for their children. If they aren't competent. They are fucked. So are their children. Not us.

Holyman wrote:
None of the lower three quintiles are much fun these days. If you're living a "comfortable" existence, then you're in the 80-100% bracket, for now. And Life deteriorates quite rapidly as you go down the metrics from there.


I don't know what metrics you use to define comfort. But these days the internet is being considered an essential service. When we were kids it was heating in the winter and running water. Even most of the bottom 20% are walking around with cell phones.

Holyman wrote:
So as Responsible Parents we must think, "Fuck! Got to make sure my kids don't end up on the streets, or worse..!".

Because...

All the so-called "competent adults" that are going before those incompetent children, have created and maintained a Dog-Eat-Dog Society.

Of which they are inexplicably proud, and understandably keen to ensure that their own dogs don't get eaten when it's Time to fend for themselves.

Facts of the matter are that we possess more than adequate technical understanding to ensure that every human being alive on this Planet can live a comfortable Existence.



Who will maintain this technology after we're gone if you don't create competent adults? Will they even care to maintain it?

Holyman wrote:

But politics, morality and our forced addiction to money prevents that happening.

Forcing our kids to grow rapidly into "adults" that can join a Rat-Race that is observably not producing Good Outcomes, seems both foolish and cruel.



I think it's foolish and cruel not too. If kids want to have a family they need to be having kids in their early thirties. Much later than that and they risk dying before they raise their children and the risk of genetic disorders drastically increases. That means in their mid twenties they need to be pairing up. Biology forces the timelines. Not my desire to prematurely force my kids into a rat race. They want a family? Those are the timelines they have to work with. Having a family is probably the most rewarding thing I've done...and I hope my kids have the opportunity to enjoy it as well. Incompetent parents don't do a good job and their children suffer.

Holyman wrote:

We as adults are starting to wake-up to the nightmare of our addiction to money.

We should wake up to the fact that trying to integrate our Children into Capitalism, as our first and foremost priority as Parents, is not something they are going to put up with any more.

:-??


I don't know what you're on about here. But the society of the future is going to need doctors, teachers, nurses, chemist, biologist, programmers, architects, engineers. It doesn't need perpetual children. I'm encouraging my children to follow their passions. Find something they enjoy and find a way to help as many people as they can doing it. Because they can make a good living and have a good life doing that. If you call that capitalism than...yes. That is one of my priorities as a parent.

_________________
What you have taken, Has been from here
What you gave has been given here
What belongs to you today
belonged to someone yesterday
and will be someone else’s tomorrow

Change is the Law of The Universe

-------------------------------------------------

“A good traveler has no fixed plans, and is not intent on arriving.” – Lao Tzu


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2020 5:14 pm 
Online
Colonel
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 12:00 pm
Posts: 21554
Location: teh internet
The bullshit housing market isn’t just bad for people who don’t have anything.

This is the latest “crisis” unfolding now, insurance companies jacking up rates yugely and condo owners on the hook for “maintenance” fees they can’t afford.

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/real ... bc-2095427

The whole condo market is a giant fucking shitshow. Apartment buildings aren’t even made anymore, everything is “condo.” These things are actually a terrible long term investment, as after a few decades everything starts to fall apart, crumble and leak, and repairs cost millions rather than the thousands you would need if you had a detached or semi-detached home instead.

Fuck all that shit. I’d sooner live in a trailer park.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2020 5:41 pm 
Offline
Sergeant-Major
Sergeant-Major
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 13, 2004 12:00 pm
Posts: 7281
Location: Close to where I want to be
Yeah...I lived in a condo for about three years. Underground parking garage needed to be fixed ... cost a fortune. Biggest expenses are when elevators go. If you want you kids to be stinking rich tell them to look into elevator repair. No shit...total tack of elevator repairmen. As a result they make a killing.

I don't get why the jacked prices in BC for condo buildings...not happening here. weird.

_________________
What you have taken, Has been from here
What you gave has been given here
What belongs to you today
belonged to someone yesterday
and will be someone else’s tomorrow

Change is the Law of The Universe

-------------------------------------------------

“A good traveler has no fixed plans, and is not intent on arriving.” – Lao Tzu


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2

All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: PBFMullethunter and 23 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited