While the latest article from the hard left was in the opinion section, it has a clear message from the elites. The leftist elites want to substitute the socialist/communist dream of owning nothing for the American Dream of owning a home and other important ‘things,’ as a reward for one’s hard work.
It’s more of The Great Reset ideation.
The Bloomberg article published yesterday calls for all of us to become a nation of renters, owning nothing.
If you own nothing, it will be so much easier for the government to come in and snap up your wealth.
“The very features that made houses an affordable and stable investment are coming to an end,” the subtitle reads. There is some truth to that. Real estate taxes are so high in blue regions that you can honestly say the government basically owns your home since they can easily grab it up if you fall behind in taxes.
The article contends that homes are rising in prices and are becoming out of reach for lower and middle-class buyers. The author then writes, but renting is nothing to fear.
After putting down homeownership, the author writes:
A nation of renters could lead to a world where location decisions are driven far more by personal preferences and life-cycle demands. Younger workers might prefer the excitement of the city. A couple just starting a family could reunite with their parents or siblings in a small town.
The U.S. is not quite there yet, and not just because too many people are chasing too few apartments. To see the U.S. as a nation of renters requires a revision of the American dream of homeownership. This country was always more about new frontiers than comfortable settlements, anyway.
He sounds like Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum who is pushing The Great Reset. He says if you don’t own anything, you will be happy.
Hmmm…do you think Schwab or Michael Bloomberg or John Kerry or Joe Biden will give up their riches and homes or is it just us peasants who have to give it all up and serve the almighty State?
Bloomberg has a caveat at the end of the article claiming it doesn’t necessarily represent the views of Bloomberg.
However, remember this?
.@MikeBloomberg tells @FiringLineShow that China’s leader is addressing pollution to satisfy constituents & secure his political future.
“The Communist Party wants to stay in power in China and they listen to the public,” he says. pic.twitter.com/B9SoAXJwrM— Firing Line with Margaret Hoover (@FiringLineShow) September 27, 2019
The left hates home ownership, especially the suburbs. They’ve long dreamt of destroying them with rules and indoctrination. Obama planned to nationalize housing by destroying local and state zoning rules.
That’s why we have Biden implementing the “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” Act without it being voted on.
Another name for all this is housing totalitarianism.
You can comment on the article after the ads and subscribe to the Daily Newsletter here if you would like a quick view of the articles of the day and any late news:
It’s ironic, really. Here in New York, the huge increases in property taxes were primarily driven by the teachers’ unions, which wanted to make private schooling and homeschooling unaffordable. But no action is without side effects, and one of the side effects of massive taxation is the loss of population, as young people opt to leave their birth states for places where there’s a better chance of eventually owning a home. So aggregate tax revenues fall. Employers in young industries, who need young workforces, relocate their businesses. The state loses Congressional representation and electoral College votes.
Now they want us all to rent! But why? Would that bring back the tax revenues, the young emigres, the dynamic, growth-oriented companies, or the seats in Congress? Probably not…but it would render us helpless before the densifiers, the “affordable housing” flacksters, the “integrationists,” and the promoters of government in charge of everything under the Sun. In all probability, property taxes would rise more sharply than ever. However, the “renter” wouldn’t be paying them directly, as homeowners do. So resistance to property tax increases would be lessened.
Has anyone else thought this all the way through?