What if Marx was right?
What if your grandfather perished in a Marxist labor camp? What would you think then?
What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?
261–270 of 462 posts
Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?
#262What if Marx was right?
That's actually a thoughtful comment, irrespective of whether one "agrees with communism". Not sure why it's being downvoted.
It's terribly vague and offers no insight as to which things Marx might have been right about. There's a child comment that's a bit better, but it dumps a lot of Wikipedia links out with little in the way of explanation.
In short, on HN it's better if you can explore ideas more thoroughly, rather than simply tossing out short quips and assuming everyone is on the same page.
It would be better to write something along the lines of 'When the article says __, this illustrates what Marx was talking about when he defined __ and that ties in with...' or such so there could be more discussion about ideas and less noise about voting or simple opinions.
Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?
#263Earlier quoted context omitted.
Predatory businesses are still exploitation. > Building such a business (and I assume running a 131 unit mobile home park) is absolutely work, the value of which is evident by the paying tenants. Running a sweatshop is still work, the value of which is evident by its customers. Just because someone needs to work or a place to live doesn't make it right or commendable.
> Predatory businesses are still exploitation. I don't think providing housing for an average of $250 / month is exploitation or predatory. In fact, a number of mobile home communities are beginning to cater towards child molesters only, because child molesters need homes too. (also, the police tend to hang around sex-offenders and check up on them, so they also make good tenants). Win/Win for everyone. Sex offenders…
It's not about elitism. The towns don't like mobile homes because the value of an individual home is tiny, and doesn't add much to the tax rolls.
Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what sense is their landlord purveying their misery? They need a place to live. The landlord offers such a place. They enter into a voluntary exchange of domicile for cash, terminable at any time. Where is the exploitation? Nobody is being tricked or duped. Two people are coming together to exchange something without coercion, intimidation, or trickery.
>>In what sense is their landlord purveying their misery? In the sense that he or she is charging 70% of their monthly income for rent. And it's coercion alright if the alternative is being left homeless.
>In the sense that he or she is charging 70% of their monthly income for rent.
No. He or she is charging an absolute amount, not a percentage of their payslip.
>And it's coercion alright if the alternative is being left homeless.
Coercion /koʊˈɜːrʃən/ is the practice of forcing another party to act in an involuntary manner by use of intimidation or threats or some other form of pressure.
There is no coercion here. Poor people are not mindless sheep, they have their own will, their own goals and their own plans. If they live there it is because they chose it. Not the landlord, and not "the rich".
Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?
#265What if? That's the whole idea of it. It's what keeps highly profitable (to the employee) jobs churning... Nobody would work in the conditions needed for diamond extraction or sweatshop clothing making for example, if it wasn't for dire poverty.
Sure they would. People will do almost any job, if they're paid enough. This is why military contractors in war zones, Arctic crab fishermen, and prostitutes make a lot of money. This is econ 101; supply and demand. You know it too. You're (presumably) not impoverished, but you'd work in diamond extraction or a clothing sweatshop, if you were paid enough.
Minor nitpick: Prostitutes make a lot? I guess depends on which part of the world we are talking about. I hear you can get them in South Asia for as low as $5. Probably lower.
Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?
#266Instead of giving money to poor people, who then have to spend it all on rent, why not provide affordable housing?
In Linz we have something called "housing cooperatives" (the German word is "Wohngenossenschaften"). These cooperatives build apartments, and to rent them you become a member of the cooperative. The goal of these cooperatives is not to make a profit, but to provide affordable housing.
And it's amazing how well that works! Rents are typically 50% lower than average, and the buildings are always well maintained. In general, they also have better amenities (playgrounds for children etc) compared to privately owned apartment buildings. The only problem is that there are very long waiting lists (more than 5 years in some cases).
It's amazing how cheap good housing can be when it's not necessary to make a profit for the owner.
Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?
#267Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> What is the alternative? These people aren't forced to live there. If there were a cheaper, better alternative available to them, they'd probably take it. What sort of lame excuse is that for exploitation? "These people could be much worse off if they were being exploited more"? Well, duh. The point is that they're in a dire situation in the first place because they're being exploited. Their landlord is not some b…
So what you are, in effect, saying, is that these poor people would be better off if the owner of the trailer park would kick them all out? Then they would not be "exploited". I am inclined to believe you are a troll, because the distinction between an aggression of violence and a voluntary free exchange on the market is quite easy to make, which in your argument you fail to do.
If every time you took an ambulance you were forced to sign over 80% of your wealth or be left to die in the streets in a 'voluntary exchange', that would be exploitation.
The difference between that and slumlords is simply a matter of degree.
Desperation is the route to profit in both cases. Truly voluntary exchanges without gaping chasms of systemic inequality do not provide opportunities for sustained profit.
Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
You need money to buy into a housing cooperative, and even more to start one (i.e. build a whole new apartment building). The poor people who are renting the apartments in the linked article don't have it; they are living paycheck to paycheck, and frequently falling behind even on that. I'm not seeing a workable alternative beyond government-provided housing, but that doesn't have a good history of success in the US.
Let's for a second assume that people stay in the same house for 30 years[1]. Why can't they just purchase the house cooperative slowly with each rent payment ? My grandma in Israel paid rent in a public housing that had exactly such an arrangement, and after becoming a pensioner, she was finally able to purchase her house. And i have no doubt such arrangements are one reason why Israel, a nation establshed from poor…
Largely because of the "Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act" of 2010.
That's right, government protecting the people again; in this case, lease-options or lease-purchase agreements with a financing component where the purchaser is living in the property during the term are now deemed consumer financing arrangements (rather than real estate financing arrangements), which are subject to review by the then-newly-created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
It all but dried up the willingness of sensible sellers to write lease-options on property where the lessee would live in the structure. Yes, there was some amount of fraud and exploitation under the old laws as well, but now that entire mechanism was closed off to property owners willing to sell and [typically] working-class families looking to buy.
Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?
#269Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you please list some alternatives? That will help us understand the situation better.
I think one of the keys would be allowing people to live in improvised housing, a la Brazilian favelas. Loosening or repealing housing standards and property would reduce stress on these people. e.g. let people in bushes or trailers without forcing them out. second, receiving mail was listed as a problem. how to get people their mail for important papers? third, allocating land for farming their own food. why should…
Maybe if more towns had free PO boxes, then mail delivery wouldn't be interrupted by moves.
Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?
#270[deleted]