• Maalus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Yeah I’m not reading that vomit of words you typed up. You wouldn’t trust a felon with your life savings. If you would, you are a moron.

      • Maalus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Trust them with what? To rent you a flat for a certain amount of money? Yaknow, goods and services? All the landlords I had were awesome people. Some of them lived in the same house as I rented a room from. I don’t get what you expect out of landlords to hate them so much.

        • Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          You would have to read a lot of “word vomit” to understand why landlording is bad. Doesn’t have to be from me, you can find it from many different institutions. It is almost like there is a lot of room to screw people over, when you are a landlord, and most do. Especially at an industry/structural level.

          Your one mention of conditions, you rented under, would fall under the small exceptions I mentioned. I expect (well expect isn’t a good word, as I fully expect my expectations to go unfulfilled) people to realize landlording is bad, and, in fact, the commoditization of housing is. Then move on to something that doesn’t seek profit from housing.

            • Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Excluding target examples that exhibit behaviors I don’t like from a group they/it is identify with?

              Where did I exclude the landlords exhibiting negative behaviors from the grouping “landlord” as a rhetorical means of defending the target group? I am saying landlording is bad, period.

              Are you saying my inference of a very few select actions can get a pass, to an extent, because they are also working around this structure they are forced to live in, however passively they are contributing to a larger problem. IE someone renting out a room in their house because the “housing as a commodity” market makes is painful to have a house? Is a no true Scotsman fallacy?