this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2026
135 points (98.6% liked)

World News

57171 readers
1391 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

You’re oversimplifying. Obviously if I want to buy a house I want the price to go down. What we are talking about here is that cheaper housing isn’t the only consequence of lower housing prices. And I’m not sure that comparing it to saying a higher tax bracket is in any way an adequate comparison given the tax brackets just don’t work that way at all. Like I wouldn’t even call that a half truth.

I’m also not saying that nobody would benefit, what I’m trying to point out is that the net gain wouldn’t be the same as say legislation that actually increased the housing supply. If your end goal is to be able to own a house wishing for a housing market crash isn’t the best wish you can make. Private equity firms bought more houses after the 2008 crash than the people sitting on the sidelines.

At the end of the day what you’re actually wishing for is one last housing crash otherwise you’re just hoping that it crashes again for other people after you buy your house and you’re stuck there.

[–] Windex007@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Ok, I can accept what I think I just read:

"Although a drop in housing prices would provide a reprieve to those who do not own, the fundamental structure of housing as a commodity is the greater beast that must be defeated"

Now, that's true, I'm 100% on board.

I do feel like people sometimes let perfect become the enemy of good. "The homeless guy doesn't need a handout, he needs a job", they mutter as they walk on by.

If you wanna think that long term, I actually don't think you've gone far enough. Government supply initiatives? A start, but still a bandaid. Massive increasing tax rates on multiple ownership. Cap on residential property that can be owned by Corporations. Rent controls. Pull no punches to establish that housing is not a viable speculative investment. You build to sell to people who will live there.

What about the equity you're about to decimate? Government needs to get back big time into the pension game. Big time. How will I live? Eat? Get medical care as I age? Needs a fix.

Until those broad changes occur, I'll still be cheering every dip.

[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I had a feeling we were only disagreeing on the means not the ends.

[–] Windex007@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

I'm glad we both stayed curious. We fucking rock