• Sundial@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Her secret weapon is addressing that generations top concerns?

  • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    2 months ago

    Reading the first paragraph gives the answer. But, if you don’t want to do that, it’s affordable housing.

  • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    2 months ago

    I love Vance’s stupid argument that undocumented people are taking your homes.

    The population growth rate is declining in the US and will be plateauing. Also, Vance wants people to have way more kids and accelerate the population growth rate.

    I swear, these weirdos play mad libs and just out “illegal immigrants” into every blank space.

  • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s an absolutely dumb idea, though. It won’t solve a single thing.

    The real fix would upset the rich. No person, entity, or affiliated entity should be allowed to own more than like 5 homes.

    That’s literally all it would take to solve the issue. 60% all all rental houses are owned by corpos. Some own over 50,000 houses they collect rent on. That’s just absolute bullshit that shouldn’t exist. Owning houses shouldn’t be a 7+ figure income strategy

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      There’s a simpler solution: no non-individual entity can own a residential property - house, condo, apartment, whatever. The exception, of course, being banks, in the interest of mortgages, but that’s rather different anyways - the bank is essentially holding ownership of the property in escrow until the loan is paid back. That one rule would go SO FAR in controlling the price of housing. Yes, scarcity is part of the issue, but blatant corporate profiteering and forever-renting is an insidious and horrifying threat that fucking NOBODY who makes policy talks about, because if they did the lobbyists would bury them.

        • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          There would of course be ramping taxes for owning multiple residences, up to 100% once you get past a vacation home or two, but you must know that that’s nowhere even close to being the primary driver of the housing crisis.

          • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            If course companies and people owning multiple homes is the driving factor. That’s the only reason it isn’t a buyers market and housing costs have literally over doubled in the past 15 years. Everything has been bought up to be used as rentals or air BNB’s.

  • ashok36@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    2 months ago

    And Trump has his secret weapon: lying out of his ass with no fact checking. Guess which one will win.

    • trslim@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      And my parents believe all his bullshit and cast doubt on anything that contradicts them.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Deflating housing prices when boomers are trying to retire is a good way to lose 2028 though…

    • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Honestly, fuck 'em… They’re rapidly declining as a voting block and if they sold the houses they bought in the 80s at 2008 prices they’d still make a fucking killing.

    • Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      In general, the boomers with houses are also the boomers with pensions.

      And we can’t afford their houses right now anyway.

  • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Changing her stance on the genocide in Palestine?!

    Oh, it’s not that? This is alright I guess… but she should probably just do the first thing.

    Edit: Sorry, do we think Gen Z is currently energized about her stance on Palestine? What’s with the wave of downvotes?

    • ManixT@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I know it’s unpopular to say, but what’s not going to help democrats win is spending so much of its time focused on Palestein, trans rights, or gay rights.

      These absolutely are important and morally correct things, but it’s just not what’s going to win the election.