this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2025
839 points (96.8% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

33067 readers
3316 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 240 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Grandma is not the problem. It’s the ~800 billionaires in the US controlling sizable portions of single-family residences through private equity, artificially controlling market prices for maximum profit per sale. Blackstone alone owns 300,000 residences.

Fun Fact: There are 16 million vacant homes nationwide. That’s 28 vacant homes for every unhoused person.

https://ips-dc.org/report-billionaire-blowback-on-housing/

[–] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 162 points 1 day ago (6 children)

I've said this before (and caught flak for it) but I think the solution to this is to apply a heavy additional tax to vacant homes (as defined as any home that isn't occupied by a permanent resident for more than 6 months a year), and increase the tax exponentially for each residence beyond the first owned by the same company or individual.

At some point, you make it so expensive to keep unoccupied properties that they're better off letting people live there for free than continuing to let them go unoccupied. Use all of the proceeds from this tax to assist homeless people or build new dense housing developments.

"But Kobold, what about soandso with their summer home?" If you can afford a second home, you can afford to pay a bit more tax on it to benefit the public good.

"But Kobold, a lot of those homes that are vacant are run-down, or are in places nobody actually wants to live!" Doesn't matter. If they're vacant, tax them. Use the money to build dense housing in the places where people do want to live. If the place is too run-down to be occupied, the owner can tear it down and do something else with it.

[–] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works 31 points 1 day ago (12 children)

One issue with the holiday home thing, they tend to be in quite remote places where there are very few job opportunities, because that's where people go on holiday.

[–] basiclemmon98@lemmy.dbzer0.com 31 points 1 day ago (5 children)

If you can afford a second home, you can afford to pay a bit more tax on it to benefit the public good.

This part applies. It's not about directly getting a house for the homeless in this case, it's the fact that they can CLEARLY afford to pay more tax.

[–] Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 day ago (5 children)

My extended family in Michigan keeps a hunting cabin that they split costs between 5 people on and can still barely make the mortage... Is that clearly able to afford more taxes?

[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 35 points 1 day ago (4 children)

I'd sacrifice your family's hunting cabin if it helps house more people. Find a sixth person or something.

It's an edge case that shouldn't hold up societal progress.

[–] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The added tax revenue would also make the rural places these vacation home are in more sustainable for regular residents. And probably keep local governments and even small hospitals solvent.

[–] AlfredoJohn@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago

It might even alleviate the financial burdens that are making that situation almost untenable for them now as real estate markets are corrected and added tax revenue gets allocated into public benefits that could reduce the cost of living. They may benefit from the proposal even if tax rates get increased on subsequent properties.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip 19 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Not really, but it sounds like your family should rather sell that cabin and spend their money on more important things.

[–] Phenomephrene@thebrainbin.org 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"Hey you know that activity that you enjoy, that makes the tedium and tests of life a bit more bearable? The one that provides a hub to maintain familial bonds, and adds another source of food that isn't factory farmed or ultra-processed to your diet?

That isn't how you're supposed to spend your money, so stop it."

[–] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 15 points 1 day ago (4 children)

The key point you're missing, I think, is that the tax would increase exponentially for each additional house owned. The first one could be, say, a 0.5% tax increase, and it could go up from there.

If you're in a position where paying 0.5% extra tax on your hunting cabin split 5 ways will bankrupt you, then I'd argue that it isn't how you're supposed to spend your money. That's "Skip eating out once a year" territory.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] chocrates@piefed.world 4 points 1 day ago

I know for the public good this is the right answer but this is not a winning strategy

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] balderdash9@lemmy.zip 11 points 1 day ago

Neither Republicans nor Democrats would do something like this. It would be siding with the people over the stockmarket/Billionaires.

[–] Xenny@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

Been shouting this for fucking ages.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world 43 points 1 day ago (3 children)

So you're saying granny would be fine with a 100% return on her investment at $36 for an offer? No? Shocked I say, shocked.

Granny is part of the problem. Not the biggest part of the pie, but still guilty.

[–] potustheplant@feddit.nl 11 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Inflation is a thing that exists. Saying that someone is bad simply because they want to update the value of their property is dumb. Also, let's say granny wants to downisze. Should she sell her home for a value way below market and then be unable to buy a smaller home for herself?

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Grandma is not the problem.

You can't go blaming the institutions for the high cost of living when it is very clearly this one anonymous old person who isn't giving this other anonymous young person a sweetheart deal out of misplaced nostalgia.

Fun Fact: There are 16 million vacant homes nationwide.

Okay, but a bunch of them are in the Rust Belt, where de-industrialization eviscerated the economy and caused a mass exodus to the Gulf Coast and the Mountain West in pursuit of lower wage service sector and sales employment.

I suppose you're going to claim that the wholesale restructuring of the manufacturing economy was the fault of a handful of 90s-era Wall Street bankers and Corporate Executives, rather than millions of Boomer-era suburbanites with pocket change in their retirement accounts 40 years ago?

Likely. Fucking. Story. This is just bigotry against the 1% is what it is.

[–] Shapillon@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago

Almost bit the bait lol

[–] Gates9@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I’ve never subscribed to this generational hatred, as true as it is that the boomers voted for this shit, on account of it’s clearly a deliberate psyop “divide and conquer” campaign. It’s as obvious as the crack epidemic or redlining.

[–] SGforce@lemmy.ca 22 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

It's hard when you work with a guy like I do. He's 65 and hates absolutely everybody, including his wife, but he's a coward so he's very polite. He requires so much coddling that he spends all day sucking up to everyone for whatever praise he can get then immediately turns around and complains about them. He'll complain about everyone else to the point where they get their breaks and other privileges taken away. Those privileges are also taken from him, giving him more to complain about.

It gets worse, but I'm about to go to bed and don't want to think about that.

That piece of fucking shit. Sorry about the rant. But guys like that ruin everything for everybody.

[–] mugthol@piefed.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It seems like that is more of an asshole problem than an age problem

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Guess what that generation bought into and voted for for decades.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] DominatorX1@thelemmy.club 5 points 22 hours ago

By remaining invisible, the billionaires avoid having the finger pointed at them. We only point at each other.

[–] son_named_bort@lemmy.world 56 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Almost helped an old lady across the street, but then she said "I need about tree fitty" and that's when I realized that this old lady was 10 stories tall and a crustacean from the Paleozoic Era.

[–] Raiderkev@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (2 children)

She gave him a dollar

[–] FarmTaco@lemmy.world 6 points 5 hours ago

damnit woman thats why he keeps comin back, you keep givin him treefitty!

[–] SonOfAntenora@lemmy.world 38 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If you were any smarter you wpuld inherit the house from your grandma and flip it yourself for big gains

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Surprise surprise, you only inherit a bunch of debt because that generation lived by "you can't take it with you".

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (9 children)

As someone who’s dealing with the estate process right now, I don’t think anyone inherits debt. It’s paid out of the estate and nobody else is responsible for those debts.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 5 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

but if theres enough debt the other assets go towards that rather than the inheritors.

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (10 children)

That’s literally what I just said. Debts are paid out of the estate. The estate assets will always be used to pay off remaining debts before the inheritors get anything.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Not really, but there's not much being left for the children of boomers to inherit.

edit: And in the broader sense, yes. Millennial and younger are inheriting the debt from Bush II's wars. We didn't have any vote on that matter, but we're the ones who are paying that off. 2.8 trillion. After the shitshow of a covid response, I never want to hear someone mention the 3000 dead.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] clockwork_octopus@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ngl, $950K for a house sounds like a steal. Can’t buy a tear-down starter home around here for that cheap…

[–] Shapillon@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (4 children)

The fuck is going on where you live?

My family and I bought a 250m² house for less than 50k. (2yrs ago)

[–] brendansimms@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

Meanwhile, in the suburbs of DC/Baltimore you have 96m² for $414k: Local Listing

[–] BigDiction@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Sounds like the SF Bay Area, SoCal, NY, GTA, VAN, or London.

[–] Shapillon@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

And I'm living in a metropolis of 750 souls in buttfuck France.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] faythofdragons@slrpnk.net 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I'm currently living in a slightly smaller house that's valued at 250k. The roof leaks and the porch is falling apart, but the town has doubled in size since COVID, and so has the cost of housing.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] charonn0@startrek.website 9 points 1 day ago

You shouldn't help old ladies cross the street anyway

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JESczegwk0g

[–] Outwit1294@lemmy.today 6 points 1 day ago

Did you do the right thing and put her down?

load more comments
view more: next ›