No? My keys stay in my pocket or on my nightstand. They do not live anywhere else. Same for all my other belongings, though I will occasionally lose my sunglasses.

Not in the US,where I live. It’s an anti-inflationary device that happens after the money was printed and spent by the government, then the people. You don’t know how the economy works.

The landlord isn’t risking their house and livelyhood. They risk not leeching your paycheck. That’s not a real risk. Poor people risk both when they start a business, or do anything. That is risk.

Thanks for proving beyond the shadow of a doubt that you also don’t understand the economy. Charity is not voluntary taxes. Charity is keeping money in circulation, just through different channels than normal. Taxes is removal of currency from the overall system. We literally used to burn the currency that was collected. Taxes are an anti-inflationary device that ends the government fiscal cycle.

You projecting that laziness on everyone else is certainly material. Communism hasn’t been allowed to even be tried there is no imperial evidence that it doesn’t work, and a fair bit of empirical evidence that it does work properly when you stop putting a single person in charge.

Landlords, like all other rich people, do not take on any risk ever. Only the poor take on risk.

Nope. Don’t need to buy those houses are now freed up as government housing. Capitalism is a disease that will kill us all because of people like you that have been so infected you can’t see any way to help your neighbors.

Taxes ≠ charity. Yes really.

No one can hoard the ability to raise one’s children to the point that people don’t have children. People and corps have hoarded housing to the point that empty homes out number the homeless at a rate of 35:1

Reverse those for my windows and Linux skills, and then put a toddler on the floor for my Mac OS skills.

If all we did was to ban landlords there would be no homeless people in the US, or I suspect any developed country, as the ratio of homes that have sat empty for more than one year to homeless people is currently about 35:1 in the US. These homes are everywhere in every major city and small town.

If we went a step further, we could be like 3 of the literal poorest former Soviet block Eastern European countries where 92% of the population lives in extremely nice government housing where the rent is capped at something like 2-5% of your monthly income.

Oh and you got it backwards. The housing is the knights. The landlords are the imaginary thing we do not need

Just like slavery used to be “common sense.” You clearly need Christ. He was a communist. He literally told his followers to live in communes and use their wealth to help everyone, especially the poor and the immigrant, not just those in their own community.

False equivalency.

False equivalency.

↑ More of you projecting your own laziness on others.

Taking enough to pay the mortgage would be a fair rent price, so long as it is a rent to own situation.

but I think if everyone just gets everything handed to them, we’d be a lot less of a productive society.

That’s what we call a personal opinion that has absolutely zero shreds of historical evidence. AKA a YOU problem.

You think this because that is what you imagine that you would do, and are projecting it onto the rest of us. The rest of us aren’t lazy like you want to be.

“We need dragons because knights need to kill something!”

That’s what you just said. If people can’t afford housing then the economy needs to be adjusted. This wasn’t an issue anywhere in the world before capitalism. Prior to capitalism there were poor people, but if they needed a house they just built one on the commons as a community for the person in need.

The 0.01% have stolen $75,000,000,000,000 from US workers in the last 45 years. The US national debt just hit $38,000,000,000,000.

Math seems to check out

I read that as “Hellboard” which sounds like an awesome mashup between Tony Hawk Pro Skater, and Brutal Legend