this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2024
92 points (96.9% liked)

politics

19121 readers
4063 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. 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.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jpreston2005@lemmy.world 32 points 2 months ago (1 children)

At the Republican National Convention last month, Ohio Sen. JD Vance even offered a radical solution to the crisis.

His plan, and Trump’s, was to free up housing stock by deporting 11 million people.

Yeah this isn't a plan, you don't have to frame it as a plan. It's literally "all your problems are minorities fault." It's a racist dogwhistle sounding like a bullhorn.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 10 points 2 months ago

(it's an ethnic cleansing)

[–] thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works 23 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I'm surprised the article didn't include a yimby definition but here you go

The YIMBY movement (short for "yes in my back yard") is a pro-housing movement[1] that focuses on encouraging new housing, opposing density limits (such as single-family zoning), and supporting public transportation.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/YIMBY

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Isn't the "yes" redundant? Should by IMBY.

[–] BertramDitore@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

The opposing folks are referred to as NIMBYs though, for “not in my backyard,” so the yes is critical.

[–] AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

How exactly will building more housing stop corporations from buying up property, stop Airbnb and the like from driving rent up, and break up landlords?

I'll bet $1000 that 5 years from now my rent will be the same or higher. This will not actually solve the problem.

[–] Pandemanium@lemm.ee 17 points 2 months ago

A lot of cities have started regulating (or even outright banning) Airbnbs. Get your neighbors on board and start a dialogue with your city council members.

There's not a lot you can do about corporations, but you can encourage other owners not to sell to shell companies.

[–] Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So just because this one thing won't solve the problem on its own we shouldn't do it. More housing, and especially more affordable housing will help by virtue of creating more supply, and the alternative is building less new housing which has the exact same problem as what you bring up with building more. On top of that corporations and landlords and Airbnb "investors" don't purchase all the housing that is available right now, so even if the rate at which that occurred stayed the same in absolute terms this would mean a lot more housing becoming available to actual residents.

[–] AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So just because this one thing won’t solve the problem on its own we shouldn’t do it

Just to be clear, you agree that more buildings won't solve the problems they're saying it will here, right?

[–] Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I agree that doing this and nothing else isn't enough, but it will help and there isn't any other one thing that would solve the problem either. Problems like this require a wide array of answers each of which only help a little but taken together are the solution.

[–] AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee -2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Then we're saying the same thing. There's no reason to get excited about such a small step that won't fix the cost of housing crisis.

Once she releases her comprehensive plan that breaks up corporate landlords, promotes housing coops and tenant unions, and outlaws Airbnb I'll be excited.

[–] HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

More housing is exactly what America desperately needs right now, and hearing Harris say this makes me want to vote for her.

But I still need to hear that she's going to do something about Israel.

[–] shasta@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

But don't we have a declining population now? I feel like tackling corporate ownership of houses would be more impactful and the supply issue gets better over time on its own

[–] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world -4 points 2 months ago

Mother Jones - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Mother Jones:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://www.motherjones.com/politics/2024/08/democratic-national-convention-obama-harris-housing/
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support