481
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2024
481 points (100.0% liked)
News
23297 readers
3470 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I think you may be misunderstanding who has all the money and all the high-priced lawyers in this equation.
Bosses have money and high-priced lawyers, workers can beat them anyway. A strong tenant union can beat a landlord just the same.
Yeah, okay. The last time I lived in an apartment building, there were six tenants. If we had tried to form a union, we would have just been kicked out because we lived in a desirable area of L.A. and he could have charged new tenants more. Should we have added ourselves to the record number of homeless so this plan of yours can come to fruition? How about all the people in single-occupancy dwellings that are renting? Should they form a tenant union of one? Do you think that would work?
It's like you think every renter lives in a high-rise.
It's like you think the wider national union wouldn't bother to help a little group of six tenants. You're basically arguing we shouldn't bother with labor unions because not everyone works in a factory.
If your six neighbors joined a union to collectively bargain, it wouldn't be a union of six people! You'd just be one small part of the broader union, which has the resources to hire lawyers and pressure the landlord.
How could they help a group of six tenants?
How could they work with single-occupancy renters?
What would stop the landlord from just kicking those people out? Do you think people can just refuse to pay rent until their demands are met? Because it doesn't work like that anywhere.
You're basically asking for people to be forcibly dragged out of their homes by cops and then becoming homeless.
Finally- what have you done about this? Have you unionized any tenants anywhere? Have you risked getting kicked out of your own home? Otherwise, this sounds very much like "some of you may die, but it's a sacrifice I'm willing to make."
When the UAW negotiates for higher wages, that raises wages for everyone else even when they're un-unionized. A rising tide lifts all boats. That's how you help single-occupancy renters.
It would also help if blue states would pass more tenant's rights laws to keep landlords from evicting people, and Biden could use the bully pulpit to push those forward. You're seemingly ignoring that we were talking about tenant unions with a national spotlight. Surely you realize that would be different, right? A shitty landlord would get national attention and be forced to bargain by public pressure, and Biden could help. Sure, some landlords would be basically untouchable (single-occupancy renters and such) but enough could be pressured to effect the market.
All of this is besides the point! I said that Biden could support tenant unions to help fight homelessness and unaffordable rents. Do you disagree with this basic premise?
You have not answered any of my questions. I asked you multiple questions and you didn't answer a single one. Not even the one where I asked you what you personally have done about unionizing renters.
So I have no idea why you think I would answer your question.
I did!
And then
And then
Now this one I didn't answer this because it seemed irrelevant. I'm not the god damn president of the United States. That's what we're talking about. I don't matter and trying to drag me in as if I am as responsible for the lack of tenant organizing as Joe Biden is absurd.
I see. So the responsibility for this rests solely on Biden's shoulders and you don't have to do anything but talk about it on the internet. Convenient.
Now that she's shown that she has answered your questions, could you answer hers?
Sure. No I don't agree with a premise when it is not feasible.
A bit hypocritical of you, and opinion cowardly, but you do you.
Insulting me will not make me accept a ludicrous premise. If you told me that Martians are eating my eyeballs, why would it be hypocritical or cowardly for me to say I didn't accept that premise when you asked me?
Dodge.
Just answer her questions.
What am I dodging? In specific?
Scroll up.
That question is another dodge, and everyone can see it as such.
I was asked if I agreed with the premise. I answered. The answer is no. What am I dodging?
https://lemmy.ml/comment/7824769
Don't move the goal posts. Go back to her comment and your reply about answering questions. Just scroll up, you'll find them there.
Once again, I answered the question. I linked to the question. I told you the answer.
No, you did not.
Do the courtesy of responding to her questions in the same way that she responded to yours, because your last comment was that you were going to respond to her questions because you thought they weren't worth responding to (and hence my original comment to you).
It's just an Internet forum. It's not like people are going to come to your home and shame you by laughing in your face or something. We're just discussing / debating topics here.
She asked me one question. I responded to that one question. You want me to do something I already did.
Here's her original question that you haven't answered yet...
And here's how you answered...
That's a dodge, that's not answering a question, that's not being intellectually honest. That's just text on a page, a hand wave, a non-answer answer, and not a valid content response.
Unless you are truly saying it's literally NOT feasible for Biden, the President of the United States of America, to help support unions?
If you are, I'd love to know why you think that way, truly?
Oh for fuck's sake, I have to literally use the word 'disagree' for you to get that I don't accept the premise to begin with? Are you really that pedantic?
If you don't like the answer because it isn't "honest," too bad. That is the answer I gave to the question that was asked.
And I don't really care what you'd love to know after you've called me cowardly and intellectually dishonest and repeatedly insisted I answer the question that I answered over and over to you. After all, if I told you, you'd continue to berate me and just not believe me anyway.
So I think we're done here.
Feel free to insult me some more.
Dodge.
🙄
Some responsibility rests on Biden's shoulders, far more than on mine or yours. You're seemingly absolving him, as if blaming him for anything is wrong.
In California at least, laws.
And in all the other states?
I'll move to each one of them and then report back to you on their laws. IANAL.
OR, people in those States can push for laws in the same way that those in California did.
Ah, I see, so if people are able to change laws, they won't get kicked out and it's Biden's fault those laws aren't changed. Got it.
An intellectually dishonest reply.
Are you able to talk to people without being rude? Because I just won't respond to you again if you're going to talk to me this way.
I've been nothing but polite. Straightforward, but polite.
Be intellectually honest, and answer her questions, in the same way she pointed out to you that she answered your questions, after you challenged her for not answering your questions.
Or do you only ask questions and not answer them?
Yet again, she asked me a question. I answered it. I linked to the question. The answer is no. Do you want me to change the answer to yes? Because that would be a lie. Sorry, I'm not going to lie to make you happy.
We're duplicating effort, so I'll just refer you to this response of mine.
https://lemmy.world/comment/7110611