What you’re not getting is that I don’t care about your parents. They are neither good or evil to me. I care about the 99 percent of landlords exploiting people. The existence of one good person in a bad system does not make the system any less parasitical.

If Congress writes the law then it can be so.

I could compare them to cops if that would make you feel better. Or the outdated western US water rights system. Landlords shouldn’t exist in the form they do now. That somewhere, someone is doing it in the hardest way possible doesn’t somehow make the system better.

You know what would help them?

A house.

To me this is the silliest possible counter propaganda. They want to get people fired up about a super popular billionaire that actually works really hard and over pays her people. So then they can paint a picture of radicals who’d have everyone living in the slums no matter what they were able to do with their talents. They won’t even wait to see the real responses. They’ll put their own in, grab the screen cap and deride us all as anarchists.

The problem is systemic though. That’s why it’s a general statement. Just like super philanthropic billionaires exist, but we still say there should be no billionaires. You don’t make a movement by adding asterisks.

That was over a decade ago. We absolutely could have covered the gap by now if we were serious about it.

And yes government housing is fine.

It sounds like your parents were less of landlords and more of providing. A normal landlord is absolutely charging enough to cover calling someone out and evicting people who cannot or will not pay.

We can worry about that when there’s a lack of places to rent and homelessness is down.

Depends on the person. There are people that mean every landlord. Their reasoning isn’t as bad as you might think either. The main issues are that they still exert control over property, a form of private governance; they’re denying the same financial stability through housing equity to another family; and they can artificially raise the price of housing.

That happens at every level of being a landlord. Of course the systemic problems only get worse as the number of owned or managed units goes up.

Most people are thinking about the giant corporations holding thousands of units.

Wow I can’t imagine why they disrespected her.

Her wealth actually grew. She gave away 17B and still came out 2B above the starting number. I don’t think it’s possible for a billionaire to give it all away. Not without just throwing the bulk of the stock shares at someone.

This list is far from complete. The entirety of western royalty is missing for one thing.

Technically. So much technically. She’s also the only one on there who is personally famous for her philanthropy. She’s given something like 17 billion dollars away.

In a note about billionaires, her fortune still grew.

Historically that hasn’t gone well.

And at what point do you hand a city over? If the Ukrainians lose the ground around it, are you going to try and do an enclave? Or does it get handed over? What’s the actual goal? Protecting civilians or protecting Ukraine? Because militarily cities are fantastic defensive ground, requiring years to fully occupy if they’re properly contested. So you’d also be taking away some great defensive terrain.

At 0.7 percentage points off a 3.2 point increase it’s absolutely not what Yoon is characterizing it as and Bloomberg is giving Yoon and his ministers space rent free in that article.

In that model they wouldn’t be able to sell without the workers agreement.

I think the study didn’t say what you think it does. The solid filtrate diet worked according to the summary, and doesn’t conflict with feed for chickens. There are vegan and vegetarian options of course, but saying they aren’t economic isn’t true.

It’s still exploitation.