you just have to make sure that the new houses aren t bought by landlords…
- 0 Posts
- 4 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
Cake day: June 9th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
Pofski@lemmy.worldto pics@lemmy.world•A photo of the National Guard deployment to Washington D.C.1·6 days agoBecause saying no when something isn’t just is the right thing to do.
People used to have principles that they just would not break, despite the consequences.
Pofski@lemmy.worldto pics@lemmy.world•A photo of the National Guard deployment to Washington D.C.21·6 days agoHonestly (and this is a personal opinion) with the view i have of people in general, they just need to spoil them the last 6 months before the election for them to forget all about all this and become loyal. Then as soon as the elections are done it is no longer needed till the next time.
Why spend all that money over the entire period when just the last few minutes are enough to change people’s mind.
While I understand your point, I don’t think I fully agree with it. If house prices are connected to inflation, what is there to stop somebody from buying a house and renting it out. The rent money is used to buy a second house and so on. The price of houses will go up, and so will the rent. But the houses themselves were bought at a lower price, so house prices going up would not have any influence on the landlord. In the meantime the rent keeps going up, reultiyin more profit in the end.
Now of there would be a taxation based on actual worth of a person. And the amount of taxation is based on the minimal income in a country…
Maybe a bit farfetched and I do not know if I explain it in a way that I get my idea across.