▲ 868 ▼ 'Renters Are Struggling': Economists Back Tenant-Led Push for Federal Rent Control (www.commondreams.org) submitted 3 years ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world 258 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] flossdaily@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago (3 children) Don't know if you've noticed this yet, but the United States has a capitalist economy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 3 years ago The US has lots of socialized losses but privatized profits. To call it a capitalist economy is a gross oversimplification which glosses over the fact that no corporation is actually competing in a free market at this point. permalink fedilink source parent [–] STUPIDVIPGUY@sopuli.xyz 7 points 3 years ago And it's failing permalink fedilink source parent [–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 4 points 3 years ago* (2 children) Semi. It's got bits and pieces of all systems, which is a hint that the "-ism" powering any country's economy doesn't have as big an impact as its leaders. Unfortunately, capitalism tends to reward corruption, it's much easier and profitable to be corrupt than to do the right thing™. Libraries are socialist. Otherwise every person in a fully capitalist system would be expected to buy their personal copy of a book. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] SCB@lemmy.world 6 points 3 years ago (1 child) Libraries are not socialist. Socialism is not, in fact, when the government does things. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) Thank you, boring and incorrect pedant. It truly depends on the definition of socialism. Is it socialist anytime a service is provided by the govt? Or solely when public policy limits the abilities of capital? You and I disagree, and that's ok cuz I don't care. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SCB@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) Yes we disagree on the meaning of a word, which means one of us is correct, and it's me permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago* You're wrong again and contribute nothing, as usual. How sad. permalink fedilink source parent [–] honey_im_meat_grinding@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 3 years ago* (1 child) What you're referring to is called a "mixed economy" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_economy And you're right - there are scales with capitalism and socialism weighing against each other in basically every economy. Finland, Norway, France are examples where it's tipped a bit more in favour of the "socialism" side. But the US has plenty of elements of socialism, from housing coops in the Bronx, to utility coops in the midwest (that helped pave the way for the electrification of rural America), to credit unions, to welfare policies, to the Alaska social wealth fund, and I could keep going. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SCB@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago* Finland and Norway have among the highest percentage of private investment in the world, to the extent that investment is the leading economic driver in Nordic countries. They are not socialist countries. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 3 years ago The US has lots of socialized losses but privatized profits. To call it a capitalist economy is a gross oversimplification which glosses over the fact that no corporation is actually competing in a free market at this point. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 4 points 3 years ago* (2 children) Semi. It's got bits and pieces of all systems, which is a hint that the "-ism" powering any country's economy doesn't have as big an impact as its leaders. Unfortunately, capitalism tends to reward corruption, it's much easier and profitable to be corrupt than to do the right thing™. Libraries are socialist. Otherwise every person in a fully capitalist system would be expected to buy their personal copy of a book. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] SCB@lemmy.world 6 points 3 years ago (1 child) Libraries are not socialist. Socialism is not, in fact, when the government does things. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) Thank you, boring and incorrect pedant. It truly depends on the definition of socialism. Is it socialist anytime a service is provided by the govt? Or solely when public policy limits the abilities of capital? You and I disagree, and that's ok cuz I don't care. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SCB@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) Yes we disagree on the meaning of a word, which means one of us is correct, and it's me permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago* You're wrong again and contribute nothing, as usual. How sad. permalink fedilink source parent [–] honey_im_meat_grinding@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 3 years ago* (1 child) What you're referring to is called a "mixed economy" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_economy And you're right - there are scales with capitalism and socialism weighing against each other in basically every economy. Finland, Norway, France are examples where it's tipped a bit more in favour of the "socialism" side. But the US has plenty of elements of socialism, from housing coops in the Bronx, to utility coops in the midwest (that helped pave the way for the electrification of rural America), to credit unions, to welfare policies, to the Alaska social wealth fund, and I could keep going. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SCB@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago* Finland and Norway have among the highest percentage of private investment in the world, to the extent that investment is the leading economic driver in Nordic countries. They are not socialist countries. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SCB@lemmy.world 6 points 3 years ago (1 child) Libraries are not socialist. Socialism is not, in fact, when the government does things. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) Thank you, boring and incorrect pedant. It truly depends on the definition of socialism. Is it socialist anytime a service is provided by the govt? Or solely when public policy limits the abilities of capital? You and I disagree, and that's ok cuz I don't care. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SCB@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) Yes we disagree on the meaning of a word, which means one of us is correct, and it's me permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago* You're wrong again and contribute nothing, as usual. How sad. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) Thank you, boring and incorrect pedant. It truly depends on the definition of socialism. Is it socialist anytime a service is provided by the govt? Or solely when public policy limits the abilities of capital? You and I disagree, and that's ok cuz I don't care. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SCB@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) Yes we disagree on the meaning of a word, which means one of us is correct, and it's me permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago* You're wrong again and contribute nothing, as usual. How sad. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SCB@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) Yes we disagree on the meaning of a word, which means one of us is correct, and it's me permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago* You're wrong again and contribute nothing, as usual. How sad. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 0 points 3 years ago* You're wrong again and contribute nothing, as usual. How sad. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] honey_im_meat_grinding@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 3 years ago* (1 child) What you're referring to is called a "mixed economy" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_economy And you're right - there are scales with capitalism and socialism weighing against each other in basically every economy. Finland, Norway, France are examples where it's tipped a bit more in favour of the "socialism" side. But the US has plenty of elements of socialism, from housing coops in the Bronx, to utility coops in the midwest (that helped pave the way for the electrification of rural America), to credit unions, to welfare policies, to the Alaska social wealth fund, and I could keep going. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SCB@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago* Finland and Norway have among the highest percentage of private investment in the world, to the extent that investment is the leading economic driver in Nordic countries. They are not socialist countries. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SCB@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago* Finland and Norway have among the highest percentage of private investment in the world, to the extent that investment is the leading economic driver in Nordic countries. They are not socialist countries. permalink fedilink source parent