Not all housing is equal, at least in so called capitalist peers, where lots of people who can afford houses in small town or village are not buying that as they live in big cities and are saving up.
I’d like to know if the housing in the socialist peers is considered equal, regardless of size and location?
In Marxism communism personal ownership is still allowed (you own your house and belongings etc.). What’s not is the control of the means of production or any property that lets its owner live off others’ labor, say factories, land, mines etc. by capitalists and argues that they should be the social or common property of the producers/workers.
Socialists want to eliminate Private Property, which is to say property that generates capital: farms, factories, stores, etc. While retaining personal property. Stuff like you’re house, your tv, your toothbrush, etc.
Now, there are some exceptions to this. If you go to Cuba, you’d find that most of the agricultural land isn’t collectivised, but is rather owned by individuals or families, who’s interests are represented by a mass organization of small holding farmers.
The historical specificities of Cuba’s land reform process meant that Cuban socialism retained a sector of small scale private ownership, within a Socialist system.
The point Marx is making is that under capitalism, as much as they talk about private property being a fundamental natural right, the consolidation of capital means that most people never have the opportunity to access that supposed right, or reap its benefits
In addition to what others have said, the boundaries between these can change according to the society and time. Fifty years ago, a computer would have been ‘private property’. Nowadays most computers are ‘personal’.
Whether you can own a house or a couple of acres under a hypothetical socialist system would mainly depend on population density. The Soviets used to give young people large tracts of land in rural areas because land isn’t really a scarce resource in Russia. (Vietnam still does this, but the plots are smaller.) On the other hand, Singapore, a capitalist country, has no private land ownership because land is so scarce.
Not in China, it’s kinda like Canada. You don’t own the land you lease it. It’s yours until the government deems it not.
Edit: because yall ignorant
In Canada, private property ownership is called fee simple. Legally, you own the exclusive right to live on, modify, sell, or pass down that land forever. However, the ultimate radical title sits with the Crown.
As you can in China I’d advise looking into nail houses where you can delay them so long that you don’t even have to give up your house/land. Most people just choose not to given the new accomodation is generally better/more modern alongside a payout.
We dont own land in the US either, we are on a perpetual lease from the government. Stop making that yearly lease payment called property tax and the government will evict you from their property and steal your assets
I’m a noob at this and I kind of dont understand. Could i still own a house or like a couple acres ? Or would there be no ownership?
Home ownership is a lot higher in currenntly existing socialist states than in their capitalist peers. Do what you will with that information.
Not all housing is equal, at least in so called capitalist peers, where lots of people who can afford houses in small town or village are not buying that as they live in big cities and are saving up.
I’d like to know if the housing in the socialist peers is considered equal, regardless of size and location?
In Marxism communism personal ownership is still allowed (you own your house and belongings etc.). What’s not is the control of the means of production or any property that lets its owner live off others’ labor, say factories, land, mines etc. by capitalists and argues that they should be the social or common property of the producers/workers.
Socialists want to eliminate Private Property, which is to say property that generates capital: farms, factories, stores, etc. While retaining personal property. Stuff like you’re house, your tv, your toothbrush, etc.
Now, there are some exceptions to this. If you go to Cuba, you’d find that most of the agricultural land isn’t collectivised, but is rather owned by individuals or families, who’s interests are represented by a mass organization of small holding farmers.
The historical specificities of Cuba’s land reform process meant that Cuban socialism retained a sector of small scale private ownership, within a Socialist system.
The point Marx is making is that under capitalism, as much as they talk about private property being a fundamental natural right, the consolidation of capital means that most people never have the opportunity to access that supposed right, or reap its benefits
In addition to what others have said, the boundaries between these can change according to the society and time. Fifty years ago, a computer would have been ‘private property’. Nowadays most computers are ‘personal’.
Whether you can own a house or a couple of acres under a hypothetical socialist system would mainly depend on population density. The Soviets used to give young people large tracts of land in rural areas because land isn’t really a scarce resource in Russia. (Vietnam still does this, but the plots are smaller.) On the other hand, Singapore, a capitalist country, has no private land ownership because land is so scarce.
What will you do with those couple of acres?
Farming, cattle and poultry. A storehouse, a small factory, and a separate kitchen house/pantry.
Depends on how industrious one is, and how much hiring and help one can do.
If you’re hiring then you are own the means of production that should be shared by the workers.
Not OP, but I would set up a basketball halfcourt, grow some weed, have a mead shed
Not in China, it’s kinda like Canada. You don’t own the land you lease it. It’s yours until the government deems it not.
Edit: because yall ignorant
In Canada, private property ownership is called fee simple. Legally, you own the exclusive right to live on, modify, sell, or pass down that land forever. However, the ultimate radical title sits with the Crown.
And the US? Try not paying property taxes on the land you “own” for a while and see how much you own that land compared to the government.
In China, the government can do the same to your house/land even if you pay all your “dues” timely.
So can most countries it’s called eminent domain
Removed by mod
As you can in China I’d advise looking into nail houses where you can delay them so long that you don’t even have to give up your house/land. Most people just choose not to given the new accomodation is generally better/more modern alongside a payout.
Also
Adolf is that you?
We dont own land in the US either, we are on a perpetual lease from the government. Stop making that yearly lease payment called property tax and the government will evict you from their property and steal your assets