We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Today’s gloriously Guardian Guardian article Well, yesterday’s actually. Or the last century’s, or maybe the century before that. Meh, who cares; with these guys everything old is new again but not in a good way. Here is your helping of reheated Grauniad porridge from someone called Rhik Samadder:
Landlords are social parasites. They’re the last people we should be honouring
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Doesn’t putting the word ‘social’ in front of something make it a good thing to Guardian readers? Surely Rhik Samadder does not share Hayek’s disdain for the power of the adjective ‘social’?
To be sure, he does say that giving Landlords a prize is
Choosing Stalin, not Hitler, is a bit off message for the Grauniad.
Well at least he doesn’t say “some of my best friends are landlords.” As for “going to hell”, when these landlords arrive at the pearly gates they could try telling St Peter they were forgiving in whom they accepted as a friend. After all, their friend thinks not one of them
‘Unregulated’ – I do not think that word means what Rhik Samadder thinks it means.
I bet he’s hell on farmers and food stores, too.
As a Landlord , I take it as a matter of pride that this idiot has attcked me in the Guardian.
I’m going to hang the article on my wall, Once I get back into my safe space and can twirl my moustache while polishing my Top hat.
What a tosser😁👍
The kulaks must be purged.
Using the same ‘turn a tidy profit’ argument many people could be considered social parasites.
For example, doctors exploit people’s need for health care and the high ability required to become medically qualified as a chance to take much more money from others than they need to live an averagely comfortable life.
The bulk of the Guardian’s readership are professional public sector types who make a similar tidy profit from selling essential services to everyone else because they can, just like landlords.
I’ll see your Peter Allen and raise you one Ann Reinking! (Or about a gazillion lesser terpsichoreans. *g*)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RA17_BuOZDg
[ I realize that this is wildly O/T, but then again Natalie brought it up. Thanks, Natalie! 😀 😀 😀 ]
Big Mac, 😆 😆 😆 , you Evil Parasite!
Dear Natalie, do you get extra pay for wading through the Guardian? I realise that you once explained that you read it so I don’t have to (many thanks) but why does anyone need to read it?
How else are they going to make money?
>sigh< Moderation? For that?
The UK must be very different from northern CA. Landlords in my area have almost no rights. The bad tenants move in and stay in your place for up to 18 months without paying a dime if they know how to work the system.
Not that different, Eric. A friend of mine’s tenants managed nearly a year and stripped the house back to a shell when they finaly did leave.
No, it’s not that different here in the UK, it’s just that ‘unregulated’ really does not mean what Rhik Samadder thinks it means. (I assume he thinks ‘unregulated’ means ‘not yet regulated out of existence’.)
(BTW, it’s news to me if landlords have any more rights in southern CA either. 🙂 )
Actually I think no small part of the Guardian’s readership prefer to mandate their services and have the government collect the payment for them by force as tax, or as BBC license fee, or similar. And some of their services are anything but essential – which I relate to their liking for making them obligatory. The element of recipient choice implied by the word ‘selling’ is uncongenial to them.
Lollzzz…here in Western Canada, I work for a large commercial landlord, in charge of 1000+ residential units. The Provincial tenancy laws are somewhat pro-landlord and, on average, I can have a trouble-causing indebted tenant evicted in about 3 weeks. If they assaulted my staff or another tenant, or were arrested (for any reason) on my employer’s property, then I can make an emergency application to the Court and have them evicted, with bailiffs, in under 96 hours.
The UK’s ‘housing shortage’, I believe, is deliberate. If developers were allowed to construct quickly and cheaply, using wood-frame buildings as they do across north America, then the problem would be dealt with in short order.
Dumb question: do they have access to cheap and plentiful lumber like we do?
Been a landlord, and known more. The profit margin, especially at the bottom of the market, is miniscule.
Not a dumb question. And answer is no.
The reason more houses are not built is state regulation, not the cost of materials.
Correct.
I have been a landlord . I let my own house while abroad. I had nothing but trouble – theft, damage, nastiness. I am glad to say that I was able to prosecute one of them for theft. I encountered some pretty unpleasant types with an exaggerated sense of entitlement. I would never let again. Incidentally I made no profit whatsoever.
Perry,
Yes of course it is government regulation, “planning”,which is responsible. Permis sion is only granted to the large developers….who later employ the planning officers who granted them the permissions….at suitably large salaries.
The UK is just as corrupt as other countries….but in a terribly civilised way, of course.
The David Ricardo view of land (from which the hatred of people who rent out land or housing comes – David Ricardo did not personally hate landlords, but his economic theory of land was used by people who did) was refuted by Frank Fetter – more than a century ago.
Peru Indiana is a small town – but Cole Porter came from there, and so did Frank Fetter. It is a pity that only a small minority of people know that Frank Fetter refuted the economic theories upon which the anti landlord ideas of Henry George (and this Guardian article) were based.
Julie, isn’t EVIL parasite redundant? Can you point to a good parasite?
Like lawyers?
For me to go over why rent control and government intervention in what would otherwise be a free market is ‘bad’, would be tedious. For me to explain why it’s government that is the problem, not people seeking profit when they buy a property and offer “to let” to renters, would be tedious.
To explain why rent control, property control, by government, creates slums and ghettoes…would be tedious.
If there is anyone in this 21st century who is genuinely clueless and genuinely curious, I refer you to the writings of Thomas Sowell. Otherwise, me explaining why hating landlords is painfully wrong minded would be a waste of everyone’s time. Apparently one prerequisite for writing for The Guardian is to be a clueless idiot.
Richard (Epstein) also disses rent control on an ongoing basis. The entertainment (which it always is, along with being informative) can be seen on U of the Toob, but I offer no specific links because his remarks on the topic tend to be embedded in talks that range over a variety of issues.