NATION

PASSWORD

Who should be able to buy houses?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
CoraSpia
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11482
Founded: Mar 01, 2014
Anarchy

Postby CoraSpia » Sun Jun 06, 2021 11:25 pm

Alcala-Cordel wrote:
CoraSpia wrote:Nope, you're entitled to what you can afford. Taxpayers (which always just means richer people) have no reason to give you shit for free.

Nope, people are worth more than their monetary possessions and are all entitled to a certain standard of living. Besides, who said anything about the taxpayer? The collective will pay for it, but it can be done with the labor value already stolen from them by the 1%.

Oh so we're talking in fantasy land. The collective doesn't exist and never will.
GVH has a puppet. He uses it to post in regions and on the forums. The identity of this puppet will forever remain a mystery.

User avatar
Nilokeras
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1437
Founded: Jul 14, 2020
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Nilokeras » Mon Jun 07, 2021 12:46 am

CoraSpia wrote:
Alcala-Cordel wrote:Nope, people are worth more than their monetary possessions and are all entitled to a certain standard of living. Besides, who said anything about the taxpayer? The collective will pay for it, but it can be done with the labor value already stolen from them by the 1%.

Oh so we're talking in fantasy land. The collective doesn't exist and never will.


I see we're on to an even purer form of ideology where you deny 'the collective' exists while a page back you were exhorting the existence of 'the taxpayers' as an interest group

User avatar
Grenartia
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43243
Founded: Feb 14, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Grenartia » Mon Jun 07, 2021 1:40 am

Thermodolia wrote:
Grenartia wrote:Housing should be a human right, and people and businesses who own more than one should be taxed at a prohibitively higher and higher rate based on how many they own. The money from that should be used to provide free housing for all.

The problem, at least in California. Isn’t so much the fact that there aren’t enough houses but that there’s more empty bedrooms than people not counting hotels.

So basically if you where required to rent out the extra homes you own so that you could fill out all the bedrooms you’d fix the homeless problem.


Only if its free at point of use.

And I don’t think we should be taxing people just for owning a second or third home. If you own say ten homes then you might want to start taxing higher


I really don't see much reason anyone needs a second or third home, especially when there's an epidemic of people having housing uncertainty, or worse, outright homelessness.
Lib-left. Antifascist, antitankie, anti-capitalist.
Mostly a girl. She or they pronouns, please. Unrepentant transbian.
Christian (Unitarian Universalist)
New sig, same Gren.
People who call themselves based NEVER are.

User avatar
Kowani
Post Czar
 
Posts: 39190
Founded: Apr 01, 2018
Democratic Socialists

Postby Kowani » Mon Jun 07, 2021 1:44 am

Thermodolia wrote:
Grenartia wrote:Housing should be a human right, and people and businesses who own more than one should be taxed at a prohibitively higher and higher rate based on how many they own. The money from that should be used to provide free housing for all.

The problem, at least in California. Isn’t so much the fact that there aren’t enough houses but that there’s more empty bedrooms than people not counting hotels.

So basically if you where required to rent out the extra homes you own so that you could fill out all the bedrooms you’d fix the homeless problem.

And I don’t think we should be taxing people just for owning a second or third home. If you own say ten homes then you might want to start taxing higher

incidentally, this isn't entirely true
a majority of those "extra homes" are uh...entirely unlivable and a substantial minority aren't actually vacant
it's the artifact of statistical methods-they're just vacant for a few months as they go in-between tenants
it's not just "seize landlord X's extra 5 houses and put homeless people in them"
you can't get out of the problem without building new homes
Sex is great. But have you tried data visualizations of partisan spatial segregation?
Our mission is to stand athwart history, yelling "Ha ha, your dog died, just like your son."
Updating Trackers! How Congress votes, what Americans believe, and world leader approvals
it's all propaganda

Headline of the day: Ebraim Raisi wins Presidential election in Iran
“Dale limona, mujer, que no hay en la vida ná, como la pena de ser, ciego en Graná”

User avatar
Kubra
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14392
Founded: Apr 15, 2006
Father Knows Best State

Postby Kubra » Mon Jun 07, 2021 7:59 am

CoraSpia wrote:
Alcala-Cordel wrote:No one should be able to buy houses

Or sell houses

Or own houses


But everyone is entitled to a home

Nope, you're entitled to what you can afford. Taxpayers (which always just means richer people) have no reason to give you shit for free.
Now in particular, or would we call this a historical constant?
“Atomic war is inevitable. It will destroy half of humanity: it is going to destroy immense human riches. It is very possible. The atomic war is going to provoke a true inferno on Earth. But it will not impede Communism.”
-Comrade Posadas

User avatar
Enjuku
Envoy
 
Posts: 240
Founded: Oct 10, 2009
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Enjuku » Mon Jun 07, 2021 8:44 am

A two-bedroom two-story house with a backyard, and a fifty-unit apartment take up the same amount of lot space. Regardless of who owns it, single-family housing isn't very efficient.

Now corporations buying up properties marketed for the uber rich, which jacks up prices in that the neighborhood can't afford? That's different. That's what zoning boards are for. No need to build luxury condos in the middle of a poor neighborhood.
Last edited by Enjuku on Mon Jun 07, 2021 8:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
| LGBTQIA+ | Stop Asian Hate | Market Socialist | Tengerist Shamanist | Pure Land Buddhist |

**I keep forgetting signatures are a thing**
On a scale of "woke" to "nope" I'm a solid "ok fine".

User avatar
Great Algerstonia
Diplomat
 
Posts: 852
Founded: Mar 21, 2019
Father Knows Best State

Postby Great Algerstonia » Mon Jun 07, 2021 4:05 pm

Enjuku wrote:A two-bedroom two-story house with a backyard, and a fifty-unit apartment take up the same amount of lot space. Regardless of who owns it, single-family housing isn't very efficient.

Now corporations buying up properties marketed for the uber rich, which jacks up prices in that the neighborhood can't afford? That's different. That's what zoning boards are for. No need to build luxury condos in the middle of a poor neighborhood.

To be fair, literally every business advertises their apartments/condos as luxury :p

User avatar
The Blaatschapen
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 59233
Founded: Antiquity
Anarchy

Postby The Blaatschapen » Tue Jun 08, 2021 2:00 am

Great Algerstonia wrote:
Enjuku wrote:A two-bedroom two-story house with a backyard, and a fifty-unit apartment take up the same amount of lot space. Regardless of who owns it, single-family housing isn't very efficient.

Now corporations buying up properties marketed for the uber rich, which jacks up prices in that the neighborhood can't afford? That's different. That's what zoning boards are for. No need to build luxury condos in the middle of a poor neighborhood.

To be fair, literally every business advertises their apartments/condos as luxury :p


Here's a typical luxury apartment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgz_bg00OZ8
1. Forumer mod, now a rocker mocker. Thank you Ringo
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8. Size matters. Bigger is forbidden and won't give the mods pleasure.

User avatar
Grenartia
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43243
Founded: Feb 14, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Grenartia » Tue Jun 08, 2021 2:28 am

Enjuku wrote:A two-bedroom two-story house with a backyard, and a fifty-unit apartment take up the same amount of lot space.


Unless you're talking about a backyard that is incredibly huge, I really, really don't know how you can honestly say that. 20 years ago, my grandparents had a 2 story house with a backyard, and at best, you could maybe fit 4 single-bedroom, single-story apartments in that space. Of course, once you get into multi-level apartment buildings, the space required for parking becomes more and more significant, and you probably couldn't make a 3-story apartment building and the required parking fit in that lot size.
Lib-left. Antifascist, antitankie, anti-capitalist.
Mostly a girl. She or they pronouns, please. Unrepentant transbian.
Christian (Unitarian Universalist)
New sig, same Gren.
People who call themselves based NEVER are.

User avatar
Peaceful and Voluntary Exchange
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 123
Founded: May 31, 2021
Iron Fist Socialists

Postby Peaceful and Voluntary Exchange » Tue Jun 08, 2021 3:59 am

Kowani wrote:
Peaceful and Voluntary Exchange wrote:\\

Leftists never learn the destructive unintended consequences of their well-intentioned efforts.

For example, if you undermine investment and profit in real estate, what do you think will happen to the supply of affordable housing?

Moreover, did you ever consider the damning effects progressive Democrat policies have on the cost of housing?

For example, why is it that housing costs are highest and inequality greatest in enclaves governed exclusively by progressive Democrats? In contrast, housing in Red states is almost always far more affordable.

i don't get how anyone thinks this is an own
the problem with unaffordable housing in areas run by democrats is a consequence of economic strength as a result of liberalism being paired with right-wing housing policy
the solution is moving left on those issues, not more market fundamentalism
the reason houses are affordable in republican governed areas is a bit more complex, and has to do with general economic hollowing-out as a result of disinvestment and trade policy (though i'd argue competitive advantage made the latter inevitable)
the problem is that the democrats are fundamentally a right-wing party on economic issues, and this shows nowhere more strongly than housing
the other problem is just
you don't understand how demand works


"economic hollowing-out" ?!

Have you seen the recent census data?

Americans and jobs are moving out of progressive Democrat governed hellholes into largely Red states. The fact is wherever there are progressives governing you have crippling inequality.

https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/medi ... 472e46.png

Leftist policies, High taxes and onerous regulation in progressive hellholes have increased prices across the board making life a futile challenge for poor Democrat constituents and lining the pockets of rich Democrat elites.
Last edited by Peaceful and Voluntary Exchange on Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
You can hate me, but don't hate me for the typos, misspelling, and grammar. While I do acknowledge command of language is extremely important, from my perspective it's the message that matters most. If there is something you don't understand because I haven't taken the time to review and edit my posts, please alert me and I will clarify.

"Be excellent to one another." -- Bill, or Ted

User avatar
Kubra
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14392
Founded: Apr 15, 2006
Father Knows Best State

Postby Kubra » Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:10 am

Peaceful and Voluntary Exchange wrote:
Kowani wrote:i don't get how anyone thinks this is an own
the problem with unaffordable housing in areas run by democrats is a consequence of economic strength as a result of liberalism being paired with right-wing housing policy
the solution is moving left on those issues, not more market fundamentalism
the reason houses are affordable in republican governed areas is a bit more complex, and has to do with general economic hollowing-out as a result of disinvestment and trade policy (though i'd argue competitive advantage made the latter inevitable)
the problem is that the democrats are fundamentally a right-wing party on economic issues, and this shows nowhere more strongly than housing
the other problem is just
you don't understand how demand works


"economic hollowing-out" ?!

Have you seen the recent census data?

Americans and jobs are moving out of progressive Democrat governed hellholes into largely Red states. The fact is wherever there are progressives governing you have crippling inequality.

https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/medi ... 472e46.png

Leftist policies, High taxes and onerous regulation in progressive hellholes have increased prices across the board making life a futile challenge for poor Democrat constituents and lining the pockets of rich Democrat elites.
Now if we pull up the article this is from
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... ty/360130/
It says that the richest districts are democratic. But weren't they supposed to be poor?
“Atomic war is inevitable. It will destroy half of humanity: it is going to destroy immense human riches. It is very possible. The atomic war is going to provoke a true inferno on Earth. But it will not impede Communism.”
-Comrade Posadas

User avatar
Kowani
Post Czar
 
Posts: 39190
Founded: Apr 01, 2018
Democratic Socialists

Postby Kowani » Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:25 am

Peaceful and Voluntary Exchange wrote:
Kowani wrote:i don't get how anyone thinks this is an own
the problem with unaffordable housing in areas run by democrats is a consequence of economic strength as a result of liberalism being paired with right-wing housing policy
the solution is moving left on those issues, not more market fundamentalism
the reason houses are affordable in republican governed areas is a bit more complex, and has to do with general economic hollowing-out as a result of disinvestment and trade policy (though i'd argue competitive advantage made the latter inevitable)
the problem is that the democrats are fundamentally a right-wing party on economic issues, and this shows nowhere more strongly than housing
the other problem is just
you don't understand how demand works


"economic hollowing-out" ?!

the fact that you're reacting with disbelief indicates to me you don't actually live in a rural area
probably suburban, then
explains a lot
the economic hollowing-out of rural and smalltown american is quite possibly one of the most documented trends in modern america
Have you seen the recent census data?

Americans and jobs are moving out of progressive Democrat governed hellholes into largely Red states.

so firstly this is an oversimplification and it's not entirely accurate
secondly, there's a key question you're not addressing: where are they moving within those states?
they're going from blue sanfran to blue austin
The fact is wherever there are progressives governing you have crippling inequality.

so firstly, there are no jurisdictions-city or state-where "progressives" are governing
you have liberals in certain areas, but as aforementioned, the problem with them is that their economic policies are too far to the right*
but "liberal" and "progressive" are not the same thing-and they have very different policy perscriptions
https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/medi ... 472e46.png

Leftist policies, High taxes and onerous regulation in progressive hellholes have increased prices across the board making life a futile challenge for poor Democrat constituents and lining the pockets of rich Democrat elites.

yeah it's almost like having economic right-wingers (please point me to any "leftists" in power) in power in cities leads to inequality
why do republican areas suffer less from it?
the aforementioned hollowing-out of rural areas, a lack of state services, brain drain, and general population density means low aggregate demand
the income inequality is low because there isn't much money in the first place
Sex is great. But have you tried data visualizations of partisan spatial segregation?
Our mission is to stand athwart history, yelling "Ha ha, your dog died, just like your son."
Updating Trackers! How Congress votes, what Americans believe, and world leader approvals
it's all propaganda

Headline of the day: Ebraim Raisi wins Presidential election in Iran
“Dale limona, mujer, que no hay en la vida ná, como la pena de ser, ciego en Graná”

User avatar
Deacarsia
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1254
Founded: May 12, 2019
Right-wing Utopia

Who should be able to buy houses?

Postby Deacarsia » Tue Jun 08, 2021 2:39 pm

Nilokeras wrote:
CoraSpia wrote:Nope, you're entitled to what you can afford. Taxpayers (which always just means richer people) have no reason to give you shit for free.


A beautifully plated meal of pure ideology, fresh from the trash can.

The pot calls the kettle black.
Síc enim Deus díléxit mundum, ut Fílium suum únigenitum daret: ut omnis quí crédit in eum, nón pereat, sed habeat vítam æternam.

User avatar
Grenartia
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43243
Founded: Feb 14, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Grenartia » Tue Jun 08, 2021 7:57 pm

Kowani wrote:why do republican areas suffer less from it?


I'd argue they're suffering just as much. They've just been brainwashed into thinking its all the fault of the Democrats, illegal aliens, and leftism.
Lib-left. Antifascist, antitankie, anti-capitalist.
Mostly a girl. She or they pronouns, please. Unrepentant transbian.
Christian (Unitarian Universalist)
New sig, same Gren.
People who call themselves based NEVER are.

User avatar
Kowani
Post Czar
 
Posts: 39190
Founded: Apr 01, 2018
Democratic Socialists

Postby Kowani » Tue Jun 08, 2021 8:02 pm

Grenartia wrote:
Kowani wrote:why do republican areas suffer less from it?


I'd argue they're suffering just as much. They've just been brainwashed into thinking its all the fault of the Democrats, illegal aliens, and leftism.

i mean
in the aggregate, yes
but not within-districts, which is what we were talking about
Sex is great. But have you tried data visualizations of partisan spatial segregation?
Our mission is to stand athwart history, yelling "Ha ha, your dog died, just like your son."
Updating Trackers! How Congress votes, what Americans believe, and world leader approvals
it's all propaganda

Headline of the day: Ebraim Raisi wins Presidential election in Iran
“Dale limona, mujer, que no hay en la vida ná, como la pena de ser, ciego en Graná”

User avatar
Luziyca
Post Czar
 
Posts: 36628
Founded: Nov 13, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Luziyca » Tue Jun 08, 2021 10:15 pm

As many as possible: in an ideal world I'd restrict the number of homes a single person/corporation can own to three: one where you live for most the year, maybe one in another city that you commute to frequently enough that you need a home there, and a vacation home, just so there would be enough homes for people to live in, and that housing would not be used as an investment.

As for me though, I'd prefer condos. All the pros of not having to pay rent (but only for maintenance), and the pros of not having to deal with yardwork and what not, plus condos would be more walkable than suburbia which would honestly be great for me as I can choose between restaurants/grocery stores/where have you as opposed to where I live where there is a corner store a couple blocks from me, a gas station convenience store a couple more blocks away and a restaurant which I've never bothered to check.
|||The Kingdom of Rwizikuru|||
[13:38] Vnik [Hardhiara] Luz is obviously the worst scout Kylaris has
IIwikiFacebookTwitterKylaris: the best region for five years runningAbout meYouTubePolitical compass

User avatar
Thermodolia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 65797
Founded: Oct 07, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Thermodolia » Tue Jun 08, 2021 10:31 pm

Grenartia wrote:
Enjuku wrote:A two-bedroom two-story house with a backyard, and a fifty-unit apartment take up the same amount of lot space.


Unless you're talking about a backyard that is incredibly huge, I really, really don't know how you can honestly say that. 20 years ago, my grandparents had a 2 story house with a backyard, and at best, you could maybe fit 4 single-bedroom, single-story apartments in that space. Of course, once you get into multi-level apartment buildings, the space required for parking becomes more and more significant, and you probably couldn't make a 3-story apartment building and the required parking fit in that lot size.

You could technically remove the parking lot element by either totally relying on public transportation or just turning the basement into the parking deck
Male, State Socialist, Cultural Nationalist, Welfare Chauvinist lives somewhere in AZ I'm GAY! Disabled US Military Veteran
I'm agent #69 in the Gaystapo!
>The Sons of Adam: I'd crown myself monarch... cuz why not?
>>Dumb Ideologies: Why not turn yourself into a penguin and build an igloo at the centre of the Earth?
>Xovland: I keep getting ads for printer ink. Sometimes, when you get that feeling down there, you have to look at some steamy printer pictures.
Click for Da Funies

RIP Dya

User avatar
Thermodolia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 65797
Founded: Oct 07, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Thermodolia » Tue Jun 08, 2021 10:33 pm

Luziyca wrote:As many as possible: in an ideal world I'd restrict the number of homes a single person/corporation can own to three: one where you live for most the year, maybe one in another city that you commute to frequently enough that you need a home there, and a vacation home, just so there would be enough homes for people to live in, and that housing would not be used as an investment.

As for me though, I'd prefer condos. All the pros of not having to pay rent (but only for maintenance), and the pros of not having to deal with yardwork and what not, plus condos would be more walkable than suburbia which would honestly be great for me as I can choose between restaurants/grocery stores/where have you as opposed to where I live where there is a corner store a couple blocks from me, a gas station convenience store a couple more blocks away and a restaurant which I've never bothered to check.

You could easily just not have a lawn. I mean that’s what I did. I have a house with just a rock lawn no yard work required
Male, State Socialist, Cultural Nationalist, Welfare Chauvinist lives somewhere in AZ I'm GAY! Disabled US Military Veteran
I'm agent #69 in the Gaystapo!
>The Sons of Adam: I'd crown myself monarch... cuz why not?
>>Dumb Ideologies: Why not turn yourself into a penguin and build an igloo at the centre of the Earth?
>Xovland: I keep getting ads for printer ink. Sometimes, when you get that feeling down there, you have to look at some steamy printer pictures.
Click for Da Funies

RIP Dya

User avatar
Grenartia
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43243
Founded: Feb 14, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Grenartia » Tue Jun 08, 2021 10:34 pm

Thermodolia wrote:
Grenartia wrote:
Unless you're talking about a backyard that is incredibly huge, I really, really don't know how you can honestly say that. 20 years ago, my grandparents had a 2 story house with a backyard, and at best, you could maybe fit 4 single-bedroom, single-story apartments in that space. Of course, once you get into multi-level apartment buildings, the space required for parking becomes more and more significant, and you probably couldn't make a 3-story apartment building and the required parking fit in that lot size.

You could technically remove the parking lot element by either totally relying on public transportation or just turning the basement into the parking deck


You can't 100% rely on public transport. Especially not in America, and especially especially not in the South. And in south Louisiana, you cannot build basements. Hell, why do you think we have above-ground cemetaries?
Lib-left. Antifascist, antitankie, anti-capitalist.
Mostly a girl. She or they pronouns, please. Unrepentant transbian.
Christian (Unitarian Universalist)
New sig, same Gren.
People who call themselves based NEVER are.

User avatar
Saiwania
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 19122
Founded: Jun 30, 2008
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Saiwania » Tue Jun 08, 2021 10:38 pm

Thermodolia wrote:You could easily just not have a lawn. I mean that’s what I did. I have a house with just a rock lawn no yard work required


If it doesn't look aesthetically pleasing, its just not practical to not have a lawn. And people can usually forget about astroturf or artificial grass because most of it has a runaway greenhouse effect where it heats up and gives off an unacceptable amount of heat depending on what hot weather goes through a location. It sounds like it'd be quite costly to fully grade a large field to be level enough to accept gravel, which in itself will be very expensive if you need a lot of it to fully cover the area.

Luziyca wrote:As many as possible: in an ideal world I'd restrict the number of homes a single person/corporation can own to three: one where you live for most the year, maybe one in another city that you commute to frequently enough that you need a home there, and a vacation home, just so there would be enough homes for people to live in, and that housing would not be used as an investment.


If real estate isn't available as an investment, then this takes away the incentive for anyone to want to do any home improvement of any sort, beyond the bare minimum like fixing a leaking roof.

Luziyca wrote:As for me though, I'd prefer condos. All the pros of not having to pay rent (but only for maintenance), and the pros of not having to deal with yardwork and what not, plus condos would be more walkable than suburbia..


Sure, if you don't mind possibly having neighbors who you can't do anything about within close distance, and if your neighboring units have renters in them as opposed to owners, you'll have to tolerate frequent move ins and move outs. As you're commuting to or from your room, perhaps boxes of crap will be in your way as this is happening.

Grenartia wrote:And in south Louisiana, you cannot build basements. Hell, why do you think we have above-ground cemetaries?


Cemetaries are such a bad waste of land. Cremation should be used 100% of the time for anyone who dies. The land a cemetary sits on will almost certainly be repurposed for something else more useful eventually, if the land keeps existing.
Last edited by Saiwania on Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:02 pm, edited 9 times in total.

User avatar
Nevertopia
Minister
 
Posts: 2272
Founded: May 27, 2020
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Nevertopia » Tue Jun 08, 2021 10:41 pm

anyone with money should be able to buy houses, but empty houses should be taxed heavily for being unoccupied.
Down with the CCP
Communism has failed every time its been tried.
Civilization Index: Class 9.28
Tier 7: Stellar Settler | Level 7: Wonderful Wizard | Type 7: Astro Ambassador
This nation's overview is the primary canon. For more information use NS stats.
Black Lives Matter

User avatar
Thermodolia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 65797
Founded: Oct 07, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Thermodolia » Wed Jun 09, 2021 10:04 am

Saiwania wrote:
Thermodolia wrote:You could easily just not have a lawn. I mean that’s what I did. I have a house with just a rock lawn no yard work required


If it doesn't look aesthetically pleasing, its just not practical to not have a lawn. And people can usually forget about astroturf or artificial grass because most of it has a runaway greenhouse effect where it heats up and gives off an unacceptable amount of heat depending on what hot weather goes through a location. It sounds like it'd be quite costly to fully grade a large field to be level enough to accept gravel, which in itself will be very expensive if you need a lot of it to fully cover the area.

I don’t even use artificial turf. I just used rocks and plants. When I lived in georgia I used moss to cover the ground.
Male, State Socialist, Cultural Nationalist, Welfare Chauvinist lives somewhere in AZ I'm GAY! Disabled US Military Veteran
I'm agent #69 in the Gaystapo!
>The Sons of Adam: I'd crown myself monarch... cuz why not?
>>Dumb Ideologies: Why not turn yourself into a penguin and build an igloo at the centre of the Earth?
>Xovland: I keep getting ads for printer ink. Sometimes, when you get that feeling down there, you have to look at some steamy printer pictures.
Click for Da Funies

RIP Dya

User avatar
The Reformed American Republic
Senator
 
Posts: 4433
Founded: May 23, 2020
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby The Reformed American Republic » Wed Jun 09, 2021 10:07 am

Grenartia wrote:
Thermodolia wrote:You could technically remove the parking lot element by either totally relying on public transportation or just turning the basement into the parking deck


You can't 100% rely on public transport. Especially not in America, and especially especially not in the South. And in south Louisiana, you cannot build basements. Hell, why do you think we have above-ground cemetaries?

We should revitalize our public transport system.
If you oppose fascism supposedly because it violates rights and destroys democracy, all while expressing solidarity with North Korea, you are no defender of democracy or rights, but simply do not like the competition with others who seek to violate rights.
This poster will not check "privilege" nor abide by the expectations of grievance studies academics.
Considered not a "true American" by the Trump party.
Pro: cultural nationalism, moderate social conservatism, green energy, protectionism, government imposed health and safety standards, single payer healthcare.
Anti: Nazism, Antifa, Republican Party, Democratic Party, Trump, government corruption, corporate influence in government, the modern American right & left.
Free Palestine. Two state solution.

User avatar
Grenartia
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43243
Founded: Feb 14, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Grenartia » Wed Jun 09, 2021 10:24 am

The Reformed American Republic wrote:
Grenartia wrote:
You can't 100% rely on public transport. Especially not in America, and especially especially not in the South. And in south Louisiana, you cannot build basements. Hell, why do you think we have above-ground cemetaries?

We should revitalize our public transport system.


I mean, ideally, yes, but that's quite the pipe dream in the current political climate, especially in the South. And even if it can be politically done, practically speaking, private vehicles would still be necessary for a significant portion of the population.
Lib-left. Antifascist, antitankie, anti-capitalist.
Mostly a girl. She or they pronouns, please. Unrepentant transbian.
Christian (Unitarian Universalist)
New sig, same Gren.
People who call themselves based NEVER are.

User avatar
Kubra
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14392
Founded: Apr 15, 2006
Father Knows Best State

Postby Kubra » Wed Jun 09, 2021 12:06 pm

Grenartia wrote:
The Reformed American Republic wrote:We should revitalize our public transport system.


I mean, ideally, yes, but that's quite the pipe dream in the current political climate, especially in the South. And even if it can be politically done, practically speaking, private vehicles would still be necessary for a significant portion of the population.
We would frankly have to totally reorient how we approach urban planning to make mass public transport sustainable.
...Which is not a bad idea, but frankly communism may be more reasonable a demand than that.
“Atomic war is inevitable. It will destroy half of humanity: it is going to destroy immense human riches. It is very possible. The atomic war is going to provoke a true inferno on Earth. But it will not impede Communism.”
-Comrade Posadas

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Absolon-7, Alvecia, Galloism, Google Adsense [Bot], Heloin, Nehemoth, New haven america, Pasong Tirad, Senkaku, Shrillland, Sundiata, Tarsonis

Advertisement

Remove ads