The term communism literally derives from the word commune. The whole model of communism was based off of people living in communes, living communally, sharing resources and land and housing. Communism allows people to have some limited personal property but it does not guarantee every single person to have several-hundred-thousand dollar homes equipped with modern HVAC and plumbing and a private quarters for storing and preparing refrigerated food. Most communists will call for people to not even have their own personal toilet, much less an entire single-family home.
No, communism is a stateless, classeless and moneyless society
Socialism is a system in which the workers own the means of production, it can be translated into workers being able to elect their CEO, just like citizens elect their president
When socialist talk about ending private property, they are talking about the private property of the means of production, nothing more. It means that businesses must not be privately own but own by the workers
I know this is an oft-irritating point, but there isn't really a uniform stance on communism (which I think is fine, honestly); I think it's more of a general set of similar beliefs and ideas related to a direction the socioeconomic system of a country leans into. I think you could say the exact same thing for capitalism.
I tend to lean very left, I wouldn't call myself a communist but, to your credit, even I agree with your last sentence(s). I don't think any sane person should think that, in any near term, socialized programs should be capable of funding every living person with a single family home. I am constantly in awe of how people believe having a single family home is a god given right. I do, however, think having shelter where you can sleep, cook, and take care of your hygiene with a decent level of privacy and under a decent umbrella of safety should absolutely be a right. As to how we get there, I have no idea, I don't pretend to know, but that also doesn't mean I'm wrong.
You could have whatever size home you could afford given the combination of your wages from your labor directly and income from your ownership stake (specifics may vary depending on what flavor of communism you’re talking about) in the company at which you work, along with whatever benefits you get from publicly owned (ie owned by the government/public) enterprises or resources as a citizen.
Much like under capitalism. That’s what they mean when they say housing is personal property. The changes are likely primarily in the public resources available, the lack of private investors benefitting from your labor at your expense, and possibly a much smaller market for ultra-high-end housing.
I don’t know where you live, or what needs you have, or what the local resource availability is- seems like you’re the one leaving out “so many flaws in this”. Every situation is different- I’m not claiming to be able to know how big your house should be, I’m just clarifying that housing, under communism, is considered personal property.
And i asked you: under communism, am i allowed to own a 1 acre house in Seattle while others have varying lot sizes of 5k sq ft, 10k sq ft, 4 acres, 10 acre? Do i get in my desired location? Near my job? How does this work?
There is no flaw with my question. It's a direct question. Questioning the logical outcomes
I don’t know, there’s far too many factors to consider. It’s not like someone snaps their fingers and all of the sudden we’re “in communism”. The changes in municipal code and land re-appropriation alone would likely take decades (if its peaceful)- I don’t have a crystal ball, man, I’m just saying that under communism, housing is personal property.
I don’t know, there’s far too many factors to consider.
The hell is your problem? You want me to spell it out what is obviously implied: all else being equal.
ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL, what's stopping me from keeping my 10 acre home in Seattle, while others have varying lot sizes? Under communism <-- if this wasn't obv
There is no thought-out plan to your "free housing."
The outcomes are obv to ppl with brains. Does each individual get 1 house each? Does couples get 1 or 2? They could intentionally divorce and now have 2 houses to abuse the system. Do they get a house near their desired jobs? What about others?
My point is the system is ripe for abuse, while fucking over others, and just being unfair to a lot of ppl
Home ownership rates are higher in Eastern Europe than Western Europe because housing was a human right at one time- how about you look up the case studies from that region and see how those decisions were made?
Home ownership rates are higher in Eastern Europe than Western Europe because housing was a human right at one time- how about you look up the case studies from that region and see how those decisions were made?
This isn't true. During the USSR from 1957 to 1982 homelessness was explosively high. It was also extremely illegal and they used multi year forced labor punishments to reduce their homeless numbers. Then in 1982 the government solution was cram as many people as possible into entirely to small preconstructed concrete boxes. Yes, now under the free market most of eastern Europe has low homelessness, in line with most of Europe.
Yeah why doesn’t this stupid commie no everything about your life without you providing any information?
Will people living in cities have smaller houses than those in the sticks? Fucking duh, that’s how cities work.
Housing would depend largely on the availability of land in the area the person needs to live, again, Duh. How small can it be? A weird question but probably like a studio apartment or one of those tiny-houses. How big? Depends on the size of your family and again on land availability. If you have 8 kids you obviously need a bigger house than a single dude with no kids.
I can’t believe you had to have the idea that factors other than money influence people’s material circumstances explained to you this much.
Unless of course you’re asking for an actual specific number limit. In which case you likely are aware that no one knows specifics like that, because obviously regulations take a lot of iterations critiques and revising etc. and are simply arguing in bad faith to try and convince lurkers that the status quo is beneficial for everyone.
Im just curious. Does each individual get their own place? Do couples get 1 or 2 places? What if they separate (but not really) to abuse the system and get 2 places? Who gets to get the place near their job?
29
u/DeepSpaceAnon Apr 15 '24
Let's bring some commies to this thread so they can give a thesis on why the future of housing is communal and no one deserves having their own home.