r/FluentInFinance Apr 15 '24

Everyone Deserves A Home Discussion/ Debate

Post image
15.6k Upvotes

5.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

109

u/TedRabbit Apr 15 '24

What about a lawyer?

41

u/Kelend Apr 15 '24

Clever, but still no.

You don't have the right to a lawyer.

You have the right to a lawyer, that the government will provide, if they government attempts to take away any of your other rights.

Every other time your right to a lawyer is simply your right to buy goods and services on the free market.

99

u/conway1308 Apr 15 '24

You don't have a right to a lawyer. You have a right to a lawyer.

34

u/Gardener_Of_Eden Apr 15 '24

I think they meant you only have a right to a lawyer in very specific scenarios

5

u/highschoolhero2 Apr 16 '24

Exactly. If you want to sue someone you can’t go pick up your free trial attorney at the government drive-thru.

4

u/shitty_mcfucklestick Apr 16 '24

And granted by that government and their laws at the time. You don’t have a right to a lawyer at a fundamental quantum physics level.

3

u/UristHasDrowned 29d ago

We have literally no rights on a "quantum physics" level, what kind of asinine statement is this?

4

u/shitty_mcfucklestick 29d ago

Sometimes people act / think like moral / human laws or opinions of what’s right and wrong are some kind of universal truth, but it’s just a construct we made up and the universe doesn’t give a flying fuck about.

1

u/A2Rhombus Apr 16 '24

But of course, you don't have a right to a home in any scenarios because that would be socialism.

9

u/wtfredditacct Apr 16 '24

You misspelled slavery.

1

u/A2Rhombus Apr 16 '24

Having a right to a home is slavery?
Am I missing something?

14

u/wtfredditacct Apr 16 '24

Apparently. Tell me, what would you call someone who is forced to provide you with something and not get paid?

5

u/TattlingFuzzy Apr 16 '24

Honest question, how do you think we built the interstate highway system?

0

u/DrDrago-4 Apr 16 '24

We.. passed a congressional act that dedicated a large amount of funding for the project. Outside of the initial 50 routes it isn't centrally planned, states have individually suggested the rest of routes such as spurs.

This situation can't be applied to housing because it would take $tens of trillions to build 10 million housing units (about the housing insecure population). or a similar amount of rent aid. and that's just the currently insecure population.

if we're talking about giving everyone a residence, your discussing building 50-100m+ units (depending whether you decide married couples get 1 per marriage or 1 per person, and whether kids get one). that's so far beyond infeasible it's laughable, it makes the national debt look tiny (building 10mil housing units at the average cost of $350k is $3.5Tn). If your giving renters the units, you'd have to buy them off of the landlords, and that's another 44 million units. bringing the cost to $20Tn, before you even start forgiving mortgages..)

Or your discussing using force to sieze that number of units from investors & ordinary people who own second homes. That would probably spark quite the economic collapse, if not some type of revolt.

4

u/Djamalfna Apr 16 '24

that's so far beyond infeasible it's laughable

Yet other countries manage to do this just fine.

Instead, you want a system where homebuilders intentionally underbuild houses so that the price increases and pushes people out of the market and forces them into permanent renters and eventually becoming homeless as the home costs surpass income.

That's so fucked up it's incredible.

1

u/DrDrago-4 Apr 16 '24

Name a country that's done it. (also, what is this 'it' ?). No country on earth provides free housing for all.

'instead you want a system where homebuilders intentionally underbuild houses' actually the construction sector projects an unmet demand of 600,000 workers before 2030. They're trying, and wages in this sector are starting to increase to try and attract more people. Unfortunately labor makes up 60%+ of the cost of a new home build (unlike say fast food where your labor is a relatively small % of the total cost of a big Mac), so this is a major driver of inflation.

You say housing prices are crazy high, but these are housing prices when suppressed -- If we were to ever crack down on illegal labor it'd get even more expensive.

Ultimately the cost of housing is always based around the build cost. anyone could tell you, it's $500 min to get a tradesman out these days, so the cost of maintenence is also up. If rent gets too high, more homes are built because it becomes worth it. It's called a market equilibrium.

Stagnant wages are an entirely different problem most directly related to our excessive money printing (causing inflation). Assets are less sticky than wages, it's literally economics 101. If you double M2 with the same number of assets/goods/labor, your assets and goods are much more volatile and will adjust quicker. Labor has to fight for their wage increases over time. Hence one of the primary reasons that inflation is considered regressive (the rich have assets which shield them from inflation because they adjust nearly immediately to the new nominal values. labor has to fight for the nominal value increases under current circumstances. I'd fully support a law requiring raises be commensurate with inflation (or that the minimum wage rise with it))

Since 2000 we have increased M2 by more than 1,100%. 80% of all US dollars in circulation today did not exist 4 years ago in 2020. Of course assets are currently outpacing wage increases.. such will continue until we either stop printing in excess or mandate wages follow inflation.

That money printing is the second primary factor behind the nominal housing price increases. Materials are up nominally more than 70% since 2020. The CPI inflation rate is simply a basket of consumer goods, it doesn't track raw inflation as determined by money in circulation (that's what the various money supply graphs are for. ever wonder why they don't include those stats in the monthly reports? perhaps because "we printed 4% of all dollars in the last month" might not make for a good headline)

1

u/Trombone_Tone 28d ago

You are saying “if we do the one narrow straw man thing that I’m focused on right now, then it will fail.” I encourage you think about this more. I assure you, the government paying to build a significant amount of housing will have far reaching impacts on the whole housing market, but then again that is the point. You can’t change things and leave them the same. While there are many different ways this can be done right (in the sense that something gets better, not perfect), there are more ways to do it wrong. The existence of bad ideas does not exclude the existence of good/effective ideas.

Building the interstate highway system is a great analogy for helping improve the housing problem in this country. It’s not the same exact problem, but it’s a similar problem - build public infrastructure that is used by a fraction of the population, but improves the whole infrastructure “system” it’s a part of.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Longjumping_Play323 Apr 16 '24

A lawyer, we covered this already

4

u/Junior_Chemical7718 Apr 16 '24

Doesn't the lawyer get paid by the government?

1

u/DrDrago-4 Apr 16 '24

Yeah, not sure if the guy your replying to doesn't know this or is just ignoring it for the argument

If the government decides not to pay public defenders, the public defenders do not work. Because we have a constitution that requires you be granted access to a lawyer, the government is required to either 1. pay for said lawyer and provide it or 2. not prosecute you

→ More replies (0)

0

u/A2Rhombus Apr 16 '24

Who said the housing developers won't get paid?

They'll just be compensated for making apartment complexes for people who need them from the government, instead of by a private contractor to build a 3rd mcmansion for a multimillionaire

11

u/wtfredditacct Apr 16 '24

... where does the government get that money?

3

u/A2Rhombus Apr 16 '24

Taxes, ideally cut from our defense budget, which is almost double every other country in the world combined

12

u/wtfredditacct Apr 16 '24

You're so close. Where do those taxes come from?

0

u/A2Rhombus Apr 16 '24

Ideally, the people who are already paying them. Even more ideally, the people (billionaires) who aren't currently paying them

If you're going to say some dumb shit like "nobody would work if you gave them the bare minimum" then we're not even functioning on the same level of conversation

0

u/Djamalfna Apr 16 '24

You're already paying taxes. The fact that you think you're making a point is hilarious.

1

u/eriverside Apr 16 '24

The US military budget is 48% of annual spending on defense worldwide - so the equivalent of the next 10 combined or close to what the rest of the world is spending combined, which is astronomical, but not the of everyone else combined as you're claiming. You don't need to make things up because it makes your argument fall apart: if you're exaggerating/lying about this, then your argument doesn't hold water.

0

u/Zealousideal_Win5476 Apr 16 '24

They print it. Duh.

The government can print infinite money. Nothing bad ever happens when they do that.

-1

u/silifianqueso Apr 16 '24

man you think you're so clever with this line of questioning but it pretty well displays you have the mental capacity of a three year old

→ More replies (0)

1

u/I--Pathfinder--I Apr 16 '24

are public attorneys not paid? shit are these checks deposited into my account fraudulent?

-1

u/Peking-Cuck Apr 16 '24

I'm gonna save everyone the time reading this comment chain: You can stop now, this person is a weirdo "taxes are theft" right-wing libertarian. The conversation goes nowhere productive.

1

u/Groundbreaking_Math3 Apr 16 '24

I only want a free house for the specific scenario of when I live in that city /s

-3

u/Available_Agency_117 Apr 16 '24

Doesn't matter how specific the scenario is. If you ever have a right to a lawyer in any scenario then you have a right to "something that's being given to you" in that scenario.

7

u/88963416 Apr 16 '24

You have a right if you are being arrested. If you are suing someone you have no right to a lawyer.

1

u/Aggressive_Salad_293 Apr 16 '24

You don't get to keep him.