weird consequences of allowing landlords 100% dictatorial sway over city and county governments
the most powerful forces in any city, local, county or state government are the rent-extraction industrial complex, our militarized police force and good old small-business tyrants
Squeeze people as hard as you can, all the time. If you squeeze some out into the street, the cops are there to shuffle them around town so they don't endanger anyone's investments with their unfortunate presence
@InternetEh idk what gun laws are like in kansas but i’d be moving in with whoever and strapping the fuck up.
@InternetEh no justification for the ban despite clear evidence of the necessity of the banned activity, not even pretending to give a fuck
@InternetEh "you know, we looked at how most urban dwellers live around the world and said, lol fuck that. You, your two siblings and your sister's girlfriend are living together? That's illegal now! Stop being a parasite and give the landlords more money!"
@rgegriff depending on how they define "unrelated," maybe they outlawed married couples sharing homes with other people too
This should be challenged on freedom of association grounds. If the fire occupancy rating allows 4 residents, then fuck off council.
@InternetEh haha, they are going to be very confused in like 5 years as their population ages out and all the businesses are like "nobody wants to work for us anymore so lazy"
@rgegriff there are nice little cities that have everything people like this dream of, but everything is closed because nobody who works for a living can live there.
@alex @InternetEh I think it depends on the scale you're looking at, as well as your particular location. Like, landlords have the power to kick people out, hike up rent (albeit only in certain circumstances in my jurisdiction), neglect necessary maintenance, etc. But property owners have the ability to prevent densification - keeping neighbourhoods as single family homes rather than allowing cheaper apartments - as well as opposing shelters, rooming houses, and other forms of deeply affordable housing. In the long run this also contributes to the housing crisis.
In my particular city, residential homeowners have an incredible amount of sway in local government. There is a lot of pressure to keep residential property taxes low, and because that's how most of our budget is funded (we don't have a sales tax, share of income tax, etc.), politicians' desire to cater to homeowners means public facilities & services that poor people rely on have been starved for years. Some councillors don't even bother canvassing apartment buildings in their wards. So that's where I'm coming from, if that helps.
@nev you understand that landlords are homeowners+landlords, yes? that a landlord also owns a home for themselves, and by definition could not be worse than a homeowner who does not also own homes they do not live in
@InternetEh lord there's not even any justification for why it's a good idea, they just say that it's happening
apparently one single article mentions that they're doing it because "people who have roommates don't care about the houses they're living in" as if it's the fault of the people renting??
@InternetEh what the actual fuck. I'm no constitutional stan, but doesn't this violate the first amendment?
@InternetEh obviously you may freely associate with either the Disney Conglomerate or the Musk Empire. Your choice!
But in all seriousness I looked up free association, and I got the impression that it has only been applied to association with explicitly political organizations. Like some town banned 14-18 year olds from entering dance clubs and thats not protected under free association.
America is so free you don't even have the right to...have friends.
@InternetEh yeah there are similar city ordinances elsewhere in the US, and in practice they are pretty much only applied to people of color, poor people, and those living "alternative lifestyles" :(((
this is so insane. my relationship to this is obviously that I had a few apartment situations in my 20s during college. but then when we moved to Oregon, my wife and I had to share an apartment in Lake Oswego (rich suburb of portland) with another student at her grad school program. we were told that out of 300 units, we were the only apartment that wasn't occupied by a single family owo
@InternetEh wow this is worse than Netflix!
Also this would make it illegal for me to stay at my partner's house if it happened here bc their family took me in but I'm unrelated 🧍
@InternetEh This is so fucking stupid. Like I get capping occupancy to an extent (you literally can't have too many people living in one space because it's dangerous), but it shouldn't fucking matter who is living there as long as you're getting paid rent!
This is nuts and seems to be a violation of peoples constitutional right to gather with whoever they wish. I hope this gets challenged like crazy
dads.cool is a Mastodon instance for dads, running the Hometown fork of Mastodon.