285
submitted 4 days ago by FundMECFSResearch to c/news@lemmy.world
all 39 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 85 points 4 days ago

Because it's a fucking cartel.

It's literally just cartel price fixing done through the medium of "a mysterious algorithm."

[-] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 16 points 4 days ago

Just like Wall St's oil pricing.

[-] Bronzebeard@lemm.ee 73 points 4 days ago

We've known this for several years now. Do something about it.

[-] RustyEarthfire@lemmy.world 7 points 4 days ago

In August, the Department of Justice filed an antitrust suit against the company, alleging its pricing algorithm allows landlords to collectively push rents higher.

[-] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 49 points 4 days ago

We're going to need a legion of Luigis at this point.

[-] sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 days ago

What would happen if a bunch of people put on Luigi masks, marched somewhere, with all their cellphones just looping this:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=6cHi1CaSlDo

[-] SanctimoniousApe@lemmings.world 5 points 4 days ago

BE the change you wish to see in the world... /s 🙄

[-] DeadWorldWalking@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

No /s

Nothing will meaningfully improve until the rich fear for their lives

Yeah, I don't think that will work out the way you imagine. They got there by being control freak assholes, so if you threaten them they'll more likely just become even more ruthlessly violent in return so they can keep control - and they've got the money to buy all the weaponry they need to do so.

[-] DeadWorldWalking@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Nah no rights or advantage has ever been won in human history without voilence, we have the worst wealth inequality in human history.

Fuck the rich, they deserve to ve afraid until they start making concessions to the working class again.

[-] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago

I believe that's the cherry power up.

[-] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 days ago

The insurance companies are hard at work creating more.

[-] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 31 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)
[-] RustyEarthfire@lemmy.world 9 points 4 days ago

In August, the Department of Justice filed an antitrust suit against the company, alleging its pricing algorithm allows landlords to collectively push rents higher.

[-] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 10 points 4 days ago

I meant more about rents than the antitrust suit. It's all well and good to hold the company accountable; meanwhile, rents have already been artificially inflated, and they don't go down.

[-] RustyEarthfire@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago

Unfortunately that pretty much depends on building more housing, which takes time and Congress.

[-] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 4 days ago

I always hear this about building more housing, but I see a lot of new housing around me which sits empty because it is not affordable.

[-] allthelolcats@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

The benefit of market rate housing is that it hopefully will be occupied, allowing for higher income earners to move into a more expensive unit and freeing up an older lower cost unit. In a perfect world this works like a chain and eventually lower cost older units become more available. Building “affordable” or “low income housing” isn’t really appealing to developers without financial incentives.

This does all assume speculators do not buy the newer housing and sit on it as an investment. More housing being built is generally all a good thing and it needs to outpace the population growth to have an effect on pricing. So even if there is plenty of new housing if it’s not being built quick enough prices will continue to rise.

If the units are sitting empty as speculation/investments that’s an issue for government (and especially local government, so get out and vote locally!)

[-] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 4 days ago

The benefit of market rate housing is that it hopefully will be occupied, allowing for higher income earners to move into a more expensive unit and freeing up an older lower cost unit.

But this assumes people are moving up the ladder. In 2024 this does not appear to generally be the case, but the system remains skewed to high earners.

(Not asking a question, just thinking out loud I guess)

[-] allthelolcats@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

Definitely, it’s easy for a large investor to build new market rate housing, buddy up with a pricing algorithm, and maximize profit. Then they sit until either all the other housing comes up in price or they eventually find someone willing to stomach the price.

Speaking from my own experience it took me a long time to move into a better apartment, not because I couldn’t afford it, but because there simply wasn’t enough housing that felt like a good value. So I sat in an apartment that was great but didn’t suit all my needs, and when I finally moved that older less expensive unit became available. If there was more newer housing, or more options in general, then maybe I would have moved quicker and that older unit could have been turned over to someone that needed it more sooner.

I guess my point is that part of it is the speed at which all this can happen is dependent on how much housing there is. And I’m also not saying market rate housing is the solution either. I think affordable housing, co-ops, etc. being part of the mix creates a more fair housing market.

[-] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 days ago

Thanks for the detailed overview(s).

I guess a mix of housing types, though perhaps more fair, is likely unattainable. As you said, developers are out to make money, and affordable housing tends not to do that.

[-] allthelolcats@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

Thanks, I’m glad I could help! Here’s a link to a video I really like by About Here on the topic if you want to learn even more https://youtu.be/sKudSeqHSJk?si=OwYu2T7G7JQGpfDg

[-] orcrist@lemm.ee 9 points 4 days ago

Right right. They're talking about it now, long after they should have taken serious action. Better late than never, but better early than late. And this problem goes back two decades FFS.

[-] ramsorge@discuss.online 15 points 4 days ago

It will be required in January for all rental places to use it.

[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 9 points 4 days ago

"The Previous Corrupt White House did one Good Thing by recognizing the Great Benefit to Landlords, the True American People™, this Software provides! That's why I, Donald Jesus Trump Lord God King Your Savior, will require all Real Estate Transactions to use these Wonderful Inventions!"

[-] Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net 5 points 4 days ago
[-] FundMECFSResearch 1 points 4 days ago

That article isn’t paywalled.

But an archive link is useful nonetheless.

[-] JohnnyCanuck@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 days ago

Having to provide an email address is a paywall.

[-] FundMECFSResearch 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

You don’t have to? I’ve never given axios my email. In fact I’ve never seen an email popup on axios, though I do have a content blocker.

[-] JohnnyCanuck@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago

Yeah, it requested an email address.

Your blocker must be blocking that.

[-] FundMECFSResearch 1 points 3 days ago

that explains it then, sorry for the misunderstanding!

this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2024
285 points (100.0% liked)

News

23622 readers
2573 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS