• girlfreddy@mastodon.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    @flossdaily @return2ozma

    Who told you rent control backfired? Cause that’s a lie. It was just never adopted as widely as it should have been, and rich owners always have the ear of lawmakers … the same can’t be said of poor/working poor people.

      • trias10@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Capitalist/free market* economists.

        Rent control works just fine in a more socialist model, especially when the government is a prime builder of housing without seeking profit, as almost every European country was during the 50s-70s. It’s only when government gets out of house building and everything gets privatisated and for-profit that rent control fails.

          • trias10@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Depends on your definition of “success.” Countries such as Holland, France, Canada, Germany, and China all have caps on the amount by which a landlord can increase rent in any given year, usually by law it’s less than 5%, or indexed to inflation (but with 5% as the max). These laws are incredibly popular with renters and have been around for decades.

            Berlin implemented a hard rent freeze in 2020 which was extremely popular with renters, but not with landlords, naturally.

            However, rent control isn’t just a hard price cap like back during the war, there are many nuanced aspects, see here for information: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/23/berlin-rent-cap-defeated-landlords-empty

          • circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The US has lots of socialized losses but privatized profits. To call it a capitalist economy is a gross oversimplification which glosses over the fact that no corporation is actually competing in a free market at this point.

          • RubberElectrons@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Semi. It’s got bits and pieces of all systems, which is a hint that the “-ism” powering any country’s economy doesn’t have as big an impact as its leaders.

            Unfortunately, capitalism tends to reward corruption, it’s much easier and profitable to be corrupt than to do the right thing™.

            Libraries are socialist. Otherwise every person in a fully capitalist system would be expected to buy their personal copy of a book.

            • SCB@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              Libraries are not socialist. Socialism is not, in fact, when the government does things.

            • honey_im_meat_grinding@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              What you’re referring to is called a “mixed economy” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_economy

              And you’re right - there are scales with capitalism and socialism weighing against each other in basically every economy. Finland, Norway, France are examples where it’s tipped a bit more in favour of the “socialism” side. But the US has plenty of elements of socialism, from housing coops in the Bronx, to utility coops in the midwest (that helped pave the way for the electrification of rural America), to credit unions, to welfare policies, to the Alaska social wealth fund, and I could keep going.

      • honey_im_meat_grinding@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The author of that article is Megan McArdle. A quick look at her other articles:

        • An article that attempts to shift blame away from media execs and onto consumers, in response to the writers/actors’ protests
        • “Higher minimum wages may increase homelessness” (literal article title)
        • Says we shouldn’t expect to keep taxing wealthy people
        • Wants to reduce medicaid but conveniently doesn’t mention the amount of death poor people will experience as a result of that, using the same austerity justifications we’ve heard in Europe already (that turned out to be bullshit)

        I’m sure she has no right wing economics bias lol

      • girlfreddy@mastodon.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        @flossdaily

        Putting all your faith in economists whose sole purpose is to back the current capitalist shitshow that rapes the land and kills the poor is a strange take.

        But you do you I guess.