You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
41 points
*

I don’t know how I feel about the “mom-and-pop” characterization, but yes.

permalink
report
reply
26 points

It always rubbed me the wrong way when the previous housing minister made a point of saying we needed to protect the Mom and Pop investors. Like - no, we absolutely should not.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Right? We need to protect mom and pop renters

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I absolutely agree. I’ll repeat a comment I made separately.

I’ll repost a comment I made before again here:

If you have half the population each have 1 investment property. You must have the other half renters. You literally want to create two classes. Those with investment properties and those with no property. One class above another. You’re just using billionaires as a shield. You want to put yourself in a class above other people.

We should all work so that each person has one home.

And the “I don’t want to work until I die” should be covered by social insurance/social security instead of making someone else a renter.

context: https://lemmy.ca/comment/4927203

permalink
report
parent
reply

Canada

!canada@lemmy.ca

Create post

What’s going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta

🗺️ Provinces / Territories

🏙️ Cities / Regions

🏒 Sports

Hockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities

💵 Finance / Shopping

🗣️ Politics

🍁 Social & Culture

Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


Community stats

  • 3.2K

    Monthly active users

  • 5.5K

    Posts

  • 51K

    Comments

Community moderators