183
submitted 1 year ago by Pxtl@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] bouh@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Insurance can collapse and their owners die in an alley. The mistake in 2008 was to save their asses. In early xxth century they would have. Now we pay them billions so they would have the courtesy to retire.

Also congratulations on discovering about how fucked up a free market is for things people need to live. Housing should not be a market.

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

Dude, that insurance is US! The government insures mortgages with less than 20% in downpayment because banks don't want to loan money for mortgages because they don't want to deal with repossession and having to sell them!

[-] bouh@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

You don't care about selling houses. Their purpose is to shelter people, not to be sold on a market.

The sooner the market crash to oblivion, the sooner people can actually live there. A government has the power to say no to bank and insurance shitters. You don't actually have to pay them your right to live. The society doesn't have to comply to every desire of these shitlords.

Yes, the economy would collapse. That would be for the best if you take care of the things that actually mater : house and food.

But I have no illusion about this kind of event happening in America. You guys are too hard into the free market and your capitalist overlords.

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago

Ok, let me repeat that.

CMHC is an insurance ran by the government. The government not respecting 400b in financial engagement would lead to the total collapse of our economy as businesses pull out of Canada. You and me are the ones who would be eating shit at that point, it wouldn't impact people that are already rich.

What you're wishing for is worse than the status quo and would kill more people than what's currently happening and you probably would be one of the ones who would be affected the most otherwise you wouldn't be complaining about the system in place at the moment.

[-] bouh@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Island defaulted on its debt in 2008. Island is still there with us. It wasn't the end of the world even it there were tough times.

Now you can have tough times for a few years while you rebuild a sane system, or you can have tough times until the end of times.

Saying that the rich will benefit more is a fallacy, or a tautology. It shouldn't be a reason to do nothing.

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

The situation is vastly different. In Iceland it was the banks going bankrupt that lead to their economy crashing, what you're suggesting in Canada would be the citizens getting their house repossessed leading to the economy crashing and then bringing banks along for the ride.

Look at the USA in 2008, not Iceland. Shit didn't get better for the vast majority, it only got worse, even today.

[-] bouh@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Btw I'm a privileged one. I live in Europe and I have a salary quite above average. Which means I'm in the 30% wealthy.

Fear of things getting worse is how the rich keep people in apathy: do nothing, or else it'll get worse. It's how they discard left arguments and solutions : this will mean the apocalypse door you and me, but especially you.

It's propaganda. Do nothing while people die rather than trying your chance at the future. If you look at the propaganda you'll see that the only chance they encourages you to take is the one that earn them your money for a chance to become one of them. "there is no alternative".

Liberalism survives only because of fear and propaganda. People die everyday because of it, and the next crisis will kill many more only for the system to sustain itself until the planet is no more livable.

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago

The fact that you're in a position of privilege is what allows you to say you don't mind seeing the system crash, you'll be ok while things get worse for the poorest. Even a decade of the economy being in the gutter would be worse for most than the current situation. Better not be able to afford a house and having to rent with roommates than not be able to find a job and having to live in the street.

[-] bouh@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

You don't need to "be able to afford a house" if it's not a free market. But somehow this idea seems unconceavable.

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago

Oh so what you're suggesting is that everyone gets the same government owned apartment... Social housing and cooperatives are already a thing though and it can coexist with a free market, no need to kill people by destroying the economy.

[-] bouh@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

That's not what I'm suggesting. You don't seem very creative about how it can work. Or false alternative is more comfortable to accept this fucked up situation that is already killing people.

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago

That's killing way less people than if the bubble was to burst.

[-] bouh@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago
this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2023
183 points (96.0% liked)

Canada

7226 readers
576 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

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

https://lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS