白浆领主What is renting?
OptimusPrimeDownfallIsn’t the land underneath the house never owned by the person, always the state? So while they may “own” the structure, it’s always in doubt of whether they will be able to lease the land again after the current lease expires.
Goun
Clocks [She/They]70 year lease, renewable via application.
Twongo [she/her]it’s a lifetime lease and prevents the accumulation of generational wealth in real estate.
not flawless but generally still miles better than what westerners have. (nothing)
It does? Do you have anything to back up that claim?
the fact that real estate is dirt cheap and not a feasible way to become a leech (landlord)
That’s not backing it up, that’s saying “nu uh” in an echo chamber.
Do better. Cause I actually want proof. Like, please, give me proof it’s better.
Uh if the 90% overall homeownership rate isn’t “backing it up” I want to know how you define “better”
OK, do you have a source for the 90% home ownership rate?
Why? Do you have evidence that suggests otherwise? Is there a particular reason you’re so adamant that China’s system must be worse than the commodified system we have in the west?
I’m not being adamant and I don’t hold that opinion. That’s why I’m asking for sources.
Until told otherwise, I hold that it’s just as bad as every other system. None are good, just different.
You realize you can type “china homeownership rate” into any search engine and find a wealth of information? Waiting for information to come to you is only going to expose you to narratives that someone has a vested interest in putting in front of you. Someone that’s trained and paid to pander to you is going to do it a lot better than a regular well-meaning person that belongs to your class and shares your material interests.
I don’t do the work to back up somebody else’s opinion. And clearly other narratives have been put in front of me - look at this thread. None of it is backed up with anything but words except by me. Like, I literally sourced the Chinese government for stuff, but please tell me how me asking for somebody else to put a modicum of work into backing up what they believe is my fault.
Bish, you dug up a bunch of sources on this elsewhere in the thread. Very specific claims from the larger topic, Chinese home ownership. The idea that you dont know the figures is laughable based on your other replies.
What’s actually happening here is you’re JAQing off and being a cretin. Learn to search for basic facts and go fuck yourself
Why would I “back up” something that is not in dispute? You are more than capable of doing independent verification if you feel doubtful of any of my claims.
In fact I would suggest you verify even information you largely agree with, or at least have a reasonable level of confidence that you won’t be proven wrong by a simple internet search when you repeat it. That’s the standard I and a good number of us here hold ourselves to, which is why folks that don’t do that tend to have quite an adversarial experience when they find themselves in your place.
I don’t do the work to back up somebody else’s opinion.
Yet you expect others to do that here for you.
You are sealioning right now. You’re asking someone else to do a shit ton of work under the guise of “just asking questions” pretending to have healthy discourse.
A lot of this sites people suck and its filled with people justifying absurd things, but right here, you are asking a question so open ended its tantamount to asking for a thesis paper, and those would still be scrutinized.
you’re right, spending half your paycheck on rent for your entire life is preferable to a tax on the proceeds of the sale of your property. very big brain there.
And what’s the problem with that?
This may be a hot take but I think there should not be forever private ancestral lands.
The city/state should periodically get the land back and resell it to cover the ever changing maintenance costs (heck you are paying this with the increasing property tax)
The city/state should have a relatively predictable timeline of when they can reliably gain control of a land back so they can plan development around it (particularly infrastructure) and not deal with someone who know they can just squat on such land to sell for an inflated price.
Having an “expiration date” on the land is a surefire way to stop ever increasing property prices, getting a home with a shorter remaining lease period might be preferable for some who is not going to stay there permanently but long enough to want to own a home and having these options be a cheaper option is a very good thing. Such expiration date also means it is easier to modernize each property as needed, this will not be the death of historic buildings because the city/state still can make exceptions for them if needed.
Also how many of the US-ians are getting a house as their inheritance anyways? Oftentimes when a generation passes away post retirement, their house gets sold to some investment firm and becomes a rental.
So the city/state should be covering maintenance costs by reselling the land… what the fuck are rates and land taxes meant to cover again?
Cowbee [he/they]The idea is to use land as a public resource, not something to be hoarded.
The answer is already there, increase rates for homes which aren’t owner occupied.
Anything else is just a tax on the working class.
How exactly is it better for land to be ownable by the populace, rather than the public? I understand that there’s taxes, it’s to combat home ownership as an investment vehicle.
PolandIsAStateOfMindI am 100% sure that even when westerners will be reduced to living in a pods, eating bugs, owning nothing and being happy (or else) there would still be massive number of homeless people to serve as warning for pod people to be happy (or else).
Sadly I think you’re right.
If they have to pay to renew the lease, that’s is a kind of property tax, especially if an individual has to compete to buy their own lease. This may or may not be the case.
There are also ostensibly value-added taxes and land appreciation taxes but I’ll admit those are not property taxes per se.
There is also this source that says that select cities such as Shanghai and Chongqing have pilot programs for property tax primarily targeted at high-value residential properties and secondary homes but they don’t have any sources, so I have no clue if it’s true.
China launches tax policies to support property market
China on Wednesday rolled out tax policies to support the steady and healthy development of the real estate market, a move that analysts believe will maintain stable expectations concerning a pillar industry which underpins the country's economic growth.
The news about the pilot is correct. Xi Jinping had been pushing for it for a long time and this is all he has been able to get so far. He is strongly against speculative growth of real estate.
AFAIK residents don’t have to compete to renew the lease. We have seen the first batches of leases expiring in recent times and no one got evicted. What I understand is that, you can’t sell your house after the lease expires, but you can continue living their indefinitely till the building crumbles. If the government decides to demolish and redevelop, then they give you a new house in the same place.
Awesome! Do you have another source for the pilot? I expect it’s all in Mandarin and I am terrible at finding things in other languages.
It’s almost like people are talking about implementing this in other countries, strange concept I know, once you’ve caught up perhaps you could contribute meaningfully to the discussion.
Oh no! It’s rude now to point out someone can’t read and respond in context
Stay irrelevant
And now look how far you’ve brought us off track. Completely derailed the conversation. I hope you’re quite proud of yourself.
I don’t feel that being capable of reading and responding in context is something worth being proud of but if you do, great, an LLM will be coming for whatever miserable excuse for a job you have very soon.
Yeah the us would never force anyone off of land.
Every government does, that’s no “gotcha”.
The US did and does it.
China did it with 1.3 million people to build a dam.
Russia is doing it in Ukraine.
Doesn’t make it any of the instances right.
Three Gorges Dam - Hydroelectricity, Environmental Impact, Controversy | Britannica
Three Gorges Dam - Hydroelectricity, Environmental Impact, Controversy: First discussed in the 1920s by Chinese Nationalist Party leaders, the idea for the Three Gorges Dam was given new impetus in 1953 when Chinese leader Mao Zedong ordered feasibility studies of a number of sites. Detailed planning for the project began in 1955. Its proponents insisted it would control disastrous flooding along the Yangtze, facilitate inland trade, and provide much-needed power for central China, but the dam was not without its detractors. Criticisms of the Three Gorges project began as soon as the plans were proposed and continued through its construction. Key problems included the danger of dam collapse,
Human Rights Watch? Seriously? Do you look into your sources at all, or are you just happy to spread imperial apologia?
Wikipedia is a terrible source for current affairs.
Your attempts to smear the three gorges dam project are part of a tradition older than the Internet. Of course, the human rights watch was all over that propaganda.
Don’t use facts. It upsets the edgelords
This isn’t upsetting anyone, though. Communists understand that the home ownership in China isn’t the same as it is in the west, our point is that that’s a good thing and is part of why their housing rates are much higher.
Yes, really it’s the worst of both worlds. In the western sense of the word, there aren’t any homeowners in China. They have to pay the premium of ownership for the privilege of still having a landlord that can evict them or demand extra payment without any legal recourse for the tenant whatsoever.
China killed tons of landlords, now the people own the land. This is just cope.
Oh right, “the people”. Just like it’s “the people”'s republic of China. I forgot, thanks for the reminder.
Yes, the people own the land, China is socialist. Not sure what your racist non-sequitor is supposed to be doing here.
racist non-sequitor
AFAIK there’s nothing racist about Winnie the Pooh, but feel free to give your thoughts on the topic here.
さよなら (toodles)
Is Winnie the Pooh considered "racist" now or are .ml folks using it as an excuse to defend Xi Jin Ping? - Lemmy.World
In all the years I’ve been around, both on the internet & among friends and acquaintances from Asia (incl. Taiwan & China), WtP has been a symbol of resistance against Xi Jin Ping and authoritarianism in China. I know .ml is heavily tankie in general, but just need a double check from the more reasonable parts of the internet.
You’re depicting a Chinese man as a yellow cartoon bear. Why is it that right-wingers love spamming that? Whatever could it be?
TheLastHero [he/him]This is much preferable way to handle land “ownership”, it should all be stated owned and leased. Insane that any private individual is allowed to pretend to “own” land.
Then the government “owns” the land. Doing something like the tree that owns itself except with all land would be even better, assuming people respect the laws. My vision would be more of a shared stewardship of the land rather than a drive to exploit it.
Why exactly is it wrong for land to be owned and used by the public?