Flumsy

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

Alright but wouldnt you then say banks, for example, are also exploiting you (because you have to pay an interest when takking out a loan)? Isnt that also exploiting the fact that many people dont have the money upfront"?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How dare they provide so much value to you that you feel the need to give them a good amount of your money.

What part is the "problem" exactly?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Exactly and where did the money come from? They earned it until they had enough to invest in a house.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The fact that you cant buy a house shows that your landlord is providing value to you, because they make living there affordable where it would otherwise be unaffordable.

My statement still stands: IF they werent providing any value to you (eg. making living there more affordable) then you could just buy a house. (But they do provide value which is why you can afford to rent but not afford to buy a house).

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

They seem to provide some kind of vakue to you, otherwise you could just buy a house.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (11 children)

Then do it and become a landlord if its that easy.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Every political opinion has a reasoning and differences in political opinions are usually based on differences in the morals or ideals of people. So why do you have to hate or discredit the opinions that dont match yours?

Refusing to debate a topic (aka refusing to hear the other side's arguments) just leads no narrower-minded people. You cant have a reasonable opinion if you have only heard one side's (your own) arguments.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Actually yes, I have had civil discussions with hard-lefts and with nationalistic right-wingers. I dont live in the US, no, how did you guess?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Everything is worthy of discussion. This posts screams closed-minded, polarized to hell and somewhat brainwashed person.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Agrees on not to be...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

This post was for (quoting OP) "berating [his] ideological opponents because they are losers". Because, (quoting OP) "to be taken seriosly offline [they] would need to present well-researched [...] arguments". So they do it on Lemmy.

In what world is this meme of any actual value? Generalizing Lemmy as leftist for their agenda, as was admitted in this case (what else could this meme be for?) is not in any way productive, is it?

view more: ‹ prev next ›