• @Xerxos@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    262 days ago

    My take?

    1. corporations aren’t allowed to own land or houses other than the office space and production facilities.

    2. people can only own the buildings they live in (with proof of living there at least X% of the year)

    3. The state takes over all houses and land that become unused by these laws

    4. The state rents out their property as ‘rent to own’, or as housing for the homeless

    • @musubibreakfast@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      72 days ago

      That’s basically China with extra steps. How are you going to deal with your companies siphoning money out of your economy by buying foreign real estate?

      • @Xerxos@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        52 days ago

        Of course, it’s basically a communist idea from even before the Russian revolution.

        To answer your question: since corporations aren’t allowed to own more than the buildings they work with, they could not buy foreign real estate - except for facilities or offices they really use.

        I don’t think I know all the answers, it was just a interesting idea I read a while ago.

        As far as I know it was never implemented, so weather it would work out or not is just speculation.

      • @Belgdore@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        5
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Corporations should be owned jointly in equal parts by the people who work there. Most live local and won’t want to do that.

        • @TronBronson@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Ah there’s that glorious protectionism that just shot the global economy in the foot! Constitutional law is gone and you’re day dreaming about reforming business law lmaooooo CLASSIC.

          COMMUNIST REVOLUTION WEN?

          • @Belgdore@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 days ago

            This whole thread is about day dreaming about business law reform.

            The whole world doesn’t stop to deal with each problem individually.

      • @TronBronson@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 days ago

        I saw a new development going up on the river and thought that. Next thought was how delightful it will be to watch the river consume it in my life time. Nature hates vanity.

        • @Croquette@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 days ago

          I say that because some people can’t imagine a system other than the current one and they said that as a kind of a gotcha.

    • @TronBronson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 days ago

      Ah the ‘state’ So donald trump should take over all housing…

      No wait, the nation of people who elected donald trump, who’s imaginary new government(which will be so much more awesome) that state should do it!

      You need your revolution first friends, im waiting. It’s your time to shine and you’re still lurking in the dark quoting theory.

      • @Xerxos@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 days ago

        I don’t live in the USA, so my trust in my government is at least a little bit higher.

        I agree that the government under trump is… not suitable for such a socialist concept. One can only hope that a better one will rise from the ashes.

        That being said, in general, control by the state is better for the people, even though it’s less effective. Taking ‘greed’ out of the equation for the housing market would do wonders.