• shalafi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Then what are banks to do with their foreclosed inventory and probably a dozen other things I’m not thinking of? There’s a line, but 1 ain’t it.

    • Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I was thinking 4 max per single owner and give banks exceptions for foreclosures.

      I don’t begrudge people their vacation house in addition to their regular house and I also understand that people’s parents might pass away and leave you their houses.

      Either 4 max or 2 max and give an exception while you have the extra inheritance houses on the market.

      Either way once you reach more than 2 they should be HEAVILY taxed, enough where most of the rent you earn should go toward the taxes and make it unviable to own and rent unless you’re filthy rich and can afford the insane taxes on it.

      • karl_chungus@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Yeah, we’re never going to find an arbitrary amount that satisfies everyone.

        Access to housing, like education, healthcare and water should just be considered essential and not allowed to be run for profit or owned by a corporation, hedge fund or any entity beyond a person.

        But thanks to Citizens United, they are people!