This is what they aren't telling you. If housing was free or affordable, there would no longer be an incentive to work hard, and any society would effectively end up as every communist dystopia did, with the bare minimum being done for ever diminishing gains.
Housing was affordable in the past and society didn't collapse
>>542242688fuck u niggerBharat
>>542242688Good. Collapse it.
>>542242688After you acquire a house and woman the incentive is to work hard for your children
I have heavily leveraged on mortgage and other asset backed securities and collaterized debt obligations
>>542242688The ONLY thing that would collapse society is jews, as we are literally seeing.
>>542242688Pretty much. Any system that seeks to collapse the hierarchy and put people like me on the same level as the people beneath me is going to implode. We can be sure of this since its happened every single time it's been tried.
>>542242688Dumb thread. Any Government could round people up into boxes for free. It's about the utility and apathy of who should be housed and at what scale.
>>542242796>Housing was affordable in the pastThe only time it was truly affordable was when people were allowed to build it themselves and it lacked what we consider basic amenities today. Ever since this changed it's been turned into a mortgage product by and for banks, the weaponization of debt for productivity gains. It also helped that war and domestic propaganda were employed to drive spite-based productivity. It's been proven beyond a doubt that once mammals obtain everything they need for secure, comfortable living they cash out their proverbial chips of effort-based societal improvement. >>542242836>the incentive is to work hard for your childrenTo put it precisely, it's to work hard for the wellbeing of your children, epitomized in housing (food supply is a non issue ever since we solved agriculture). If a parent knows that need is secured from the outset, your effort in providing for your offspring diminishes considerably.
>>542242688>with the bare minimum being done for ever diminishing gains.so quite a bit like modern day America?
>>542242688>Free or affordable housing would collapse societyNo-one expects free housing. But housing absolutely needs to be affordable. My father in the 1960's could buy a home with 4 years of savings and raise a family in that home on a single income. Today both working partners needs to save for 15 years in order to achieve the same thing. This enslaves people into jobs they don't want to be in. Robotics tech is rapidly increasing, and AI is already replacing workers in some industries. When the corporate fat cats replace people with robotic tech, which they absolutely will, housing must become more affordable.
There is not a single detached home within an hour drive from me that is under 700,000 and not only that I dont have a town over 20k within probably an hour and a half drive.
>>542242688So, by your logic, the rich are incapable of working hard?
>>542244582>My father in the 1960's could buy a home with 4 years of savings and raise a family in that home on a single incomeThis was the beginning of the collapse, mind you. It just wasn't as noticable then. All because of affordable housing. You think boomers were just born the way they are, entitled and resentful? No, they were conditioned to be that way, because they were allowed effortless living which compounded over time rotted their souls. They aren't willing to compromise, they just want to get theirs even if it costs everyone else dearly. If they would have had to work hard for housing, they would surely now be more invested in the wellbeing of subsequent generations. But they are not, because their hurdles were removed and with them their motivation. Quite the conundrum that the more a society improves materially, the ultimate goal in most, the more susceptible it becomes to collapse. It's as if humans were meant to either live by spiritual goals foremost and be kept at a steady level of struggle.>>542245335The rich by legacy? Yes. The rich by self-merit? No, as is itself evident.
>>542242688Don't care, hang landlords and bankers.
>>542245605>But they are not, because their hurdles were removed and with them their motivationMotivation for societal thriving which is necessarily a multigenerational ordeal, not their own selfish temporal gains of course, extremely present in that generation and at odds with the former motivation.
>>542242688>point of work isnt to solve problems its to keep poeple busySpoken like a true parasitic jew.>>542244287>The only time it was truly affordable was when people were allowed to build it themselves and it lacked what we consider basic amenities today.Those amenities are literaly more light sockets or manybe more plumming. A joke of a job. Society doesnt improve if people keep working bulshit jobs for oligarchs or goverment .In fact even if 90% of poeple just sit drink and watch TV 10% of creatives would create way more tehnological progress than is currently created in society that punishes those poeple and forces them to do boring soul chrushing jobs. I wont even mention the amont of evil parasites that thrive.
>>542244287>The only time it was truly affordable was when people were allowed to build it themselvesNo, you are wrong.Stop being a parasite.
>>542242688You're right it would collapse society, but it's because we've been economically overleveraged on using mortgages as backing for investment funds for decades. There are a few obvious holes with your incentive theory. Take for instance that the two variables (non-home ownership and productivity) aren't even correlated. The logical entailment from your premise would be that the homeless perform the overwhelming majority of society's labor, and home owners do nothing.
>>542245605Humans are not meant to struggle. Hunther gatherers live pretty easy lives and they are opposite of boomers. Hard work makes you stupid and kills your creativity. Slavery actually makes poeple morally worse in all regards.
>>542242688Society is already collapsing and housing has never been more expensive. Fuck off faggot.
Also Private Equity figured out that it can leverage crust punks and homeless schizos to make people uncomfortable, or terrorize them in extreme cases, to get them to flee a neighborhood and move into a new real estate development that they themselves funded. They're tricky little fuckers like that. The idea is to create perpetual wealth-extraction schemes, more or less.
>>542246428Its rentier economy retardation.Having expensive housing kills economy and industry in so many ways. Poeple cant move cant open buisness because land is too expensive cant store machinery. It kills productivity in all possible ways.
>>542242688Insanely unaffordable housing like we have now leads to social collapse. No one is having kids except monkeys on welfare.
>>542246428>non-home ownership and productivityMisconstruction, it's not the fact of homeownership itself but the means of homeownership. Indebtedness puts pressure on productivity. To acquire a home, if one needs to get into debt, this then translates into a constant reminder of the necessity for productivity. Home owners are rarely the real owners in this system for most of their lives.
I get to vote for housing AND collapsing society simultaneously? Awesome!
>>542246938And having a 20kg rock on your back 24/7 will make you a better fighter than someone thats free to train.
>>542246791>Having expensive housing kills economy and industry in so many ways.That's true, but it also represents short term gains for some. The idea they're gunning for is to find the optimization line where you're paying the most they can possibly get out of you in rent.The obvious fact that this system is way too fragile to work over a long period of time is currently not generally accepted, even though it's flagrantly obvious. The immorality of the whole thing is seemingly beyond them. They don't think it will ever bite them in the ass.>>542246938>it's not the fact of homeownership itself but the means of homeownershipYour solution to the absurdity is to create an even bigger hole by reducing the constraint? Now you don't even need to actionalize the ability to own a home. The mere ability within your worldline to acquire one is enough to fry productivity.You can keep trying to plug this gap anon, but the problem is in your premise. You can't fill the hole because it doesn't correlate to reality. It's why as we're watching housing become even more unaffordable, more and more people are just dropping out and accepting hell. Your proposed stick is observably ineffective. As stupid as it sounds, you can't fix a society with a carrot or a stick. You fix a society by fixing the society. Punishment and reward don't guide higher order scheduling behaviors. Leaning into conditioning too much just encourages exactly what you're terrified of: optimization into a minima, or in this case, complete desensitization. Oopsies! The unfortunate reality is that this also makes it much harder to fix things. We're gonna have at least two lost generations.
>>542247375/thread
>>542247375The whole system runs on pure propaganda with 0 substance. Soon it will be mask off since no one is buying think tank bulshit anymore.A nigger moment will arrive where rich will just be killed on spot.
>>542247375>Now you don't even need to actionalize the ability to own a home. The mere ability within your worldline to acquire one is enough to fry productivity.No. I didn't say "humans are machines that one input increased over time translates to proportional gain". I said there is a system of incentives and it is optimal to have a certain amount of struggle, that merely affordable housing doesn't satisfy, in order to get the best outcome in the gains side of the equation. Housing should be possible for most, but outside of reach to the commoner without something being given back, namely hard work. Affordability (in my definition the generalized ability to buy a home without decades-spanning indebtedness) trumps this scheme because once you are in possession of your home and the only way it's taken from you is if you refuse to earn any income at all, this grants the owner too much of a gap for relaxation which costs us all the productivity needed for survival. People can tolerate some stress just fine, it is even good that they do. They can't, however and at any event, be allowed the luxury of being given the choice of checking out, at least until they are irrelevant to productivity.
My sugar mommy pays for everything. I don't actually even have to go to work, she's wealthy enough.
>>542248060>namely hard workDescribe that in more detail, please.>>542248060>They can't, however and at any event, be allowed the luxury of being given the choice of checking out, at least until they are irrelevant to productivity.How are you relevant to productivity?
>>542248333>Describe that in more detail, please.It's simple. Being assiduous and putting sensible effort into any job you are hired to do, for enough compensation to keep owning a home, for many years. No room for slacking off. This includes any job except those that are by their nature exploitative, that is, they take more than they give back.I work.
>>542249321>This includes any job except those that are by their nature exploitative, that is, they take more than they give back.Yet, you are trying promote an idea that is exploitative by nature.>I work.Not hard enough if you really want to sell this ridiculous idea.
>>542249661>Yet, you are trying promote an idea that is exploitative by nature.It isn't by the definition I very deliberately specified, because it keeps people on their most productive behavior and wards off collapse, so it's greatly more beneficial than otherwise.
>>542244287>Having a home to upkeep and repair isn't incentive to learn and work to pay for said upkeep. You fucking retard nigger. Have you met a single male? Ever? Tits or gtfo
>>542242688So why do people work after they have enough to retire?
