• can@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I don’t know how I feel about the “mom-and-pop” characterization, but yes.

    • BedSharkPal@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      It always rubbed me the wrong way when the previous housing minister made a point of saying we needed to protect the Mom and Pop investors. Like - no, we absolutely should not.

    • twopi@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I absolutely agree. I’ll repeat a comment I made separately.

      I’ll repost a comment I made before again here:

      If you have half the population each have 1 investment property. You must have the other half renters. You literally want to create two classes. Those with investment properties and those with no property. One class above another. You’re just using billionaires as a shield. You want to put yourself in a class above other people.

      We should all work so that each person has one home.

      And the “I don’t want to work until I die” should be covered by social insurance/social security instead of making someone else a renter.

      context: https://lemmy.ca/comment/4927203