Originally Posted by
MrTickle
You really don't have a fucking clue, do you? What does this have to do with collective ownership? This is people with PRIVATE property being allowed to build WHAT THEY WANT on THEIR OWN PROPERTY. If this was socialism then people could say "no we dont want that" and it wouldnt happen.
Do you think the rent money is going to the local residents? or private companies?
Once again Druff makes a statement about a political system he knows nothing about, has likely never formally studied or even read any of it's major texts.
Go back to criticising social justice warriors.
(by the way, we all know what you mean by undesirables)
I didn't say it was collective ownership. However, I said that this was a way for the many to degrade the fruits of the labor from the individual, by denying these individuals the ability to live in safe neighborhoods amongst themselves.
You wrote, "This is people with PRIVATE PROPERTY being allowed to build WHAT THEY WANT on THEIR OWN PROPERTY", but that's a huge oversimplification.
Zoning laws are extremely important, as the lack of them can destroy both the value and enjoyment of all the properties in the area.
What if I was allowed to wreck my house and replace it with a strip club? It's my property, right? Why shouldn't I have a right?
Because it would destroy the neighborhood, lower property values, and cause distress for all of the neighbors (well, at least the ones who aren't single men).
Let's take it a step further. Let's say I was allowed to set my own house on fire because I enjoyed seeing it burn. See any problem with doing that, even if it's my own property?
Zoning laws exist to prevent others from fucking up the value/enjoyment of what you own, which is a pretty damn good reason for them to exist.
Note that this law doesn't simply change zoning for certain neighborhoods which might benefit from it. It makes single family zoning ILLEGAL in all Minneapolis neighborhoods.
Oh wait, are you still debating the definition of the word "socialism" with me?
That's a dumb debate.
You described this as "deregulated capitalism", which it definitely isn't, as this is being done with the intent of busting up the expensive white neighborhoods by allowing multi-family housing there. Again, yes, some businesses will benefit from this, but that doesn't make it a capitalist policy when its point is to create equalization in neighborhoods.