Yes.

US went so far as to bring down a sovereign nations Presidential plane to search it for Snowden.

I wonder if Morales got any concessions for agreeing to land his plane and allow a search.

Are you suggesting that that the nature of a murder victim shouldn’t be relevant in a murder trial? Killing a bad guy should be potentially completely mitigating. We have precedent for that. For example, Gary Plauché served no prison time for publicly murdering his son’s rapist.

Sometimes a murder victim deserved it. As a CEO of a major private health insurance company, notorious in its own right for claim denials, Mr. Thompson was significantly responsible for a good amount of social murder. There are of course other social murderers out there, but we should be grateful this one was stopped.

Anyway, the working class is already disproportionately victimized by the bourgeoisie. They’re the ones with no moral standing. They’re the ones asking for it.

Nope. The US government should just create its own uncounterfeitable, energy efficient digital dollar. Put Bitcoin out of business.

Yes. It’s when the workers are driven to the point that they cannot do enough reproductive labor and/or they revolt.

If anyone was planning on giving @[email protected] something nice for Christmas, they can give it to me instead.

In a Pixelfed or Mastodon post, if you end the post with the handle of a Lemmy community, it will usually post to that Lemmy community. Here is an example of a Pixelfed post showing up on Lemmy:

• https://pixelfed.crimedad.work/i/web/post/763216516514804651
• https://lemmy.crimedad.work/post/152927

Not sure what you mean, but pitting enemies against each other is also an option.

Rental income is just a dividend on a real estate investment. Even if you own the house you live in, you get that dividend in the form of not having to pay rent to a landlord.

Just one sock of the pair is discolored? Maybe try washing the just the other sock with some poopy underwear to make it browner so the pair matches again.

Maybe it will be some consolation for you to remember that you and your coworker have a common adversary: your employer. If you find yourself taking your ignorant coworker’s bait, you can try constructively twisting it or redirecting her complaints against the ownership.

(Source)

Bon appétit!

I’m sorry if you feel offended, but I’m using this terminology objectively. I do not believe that being a landlord automatically makes someone a bad person. However, landlordism is an harmful feature of our predominant mode of production. It relies on the prevalence of homelessness as a credible threat, after all.

Your list of anecdotal bad experiences people have had with landlords is utterly immaterial to the discussion of whether landlording is definitionally unethical.

I don’t think I listed any anecdotes. You expressed interest in emotional reasoning as to why people resent landlords so I copied some examples of it that I had already written. The ethicality of being a landlord isn’t relevant to the economic role of landlords as parasites.

The rental income that a landlord collects is not a wage based on any labor that they do.

First of all, how is that true?

The fact that landlord’s do not collect rent based on any labor that they do hasn’t been in question since Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations at the latest. Rental income is also known as passive or unearned income. That’s the appeal of it to landlords or prospective landlords. It’s an established concept. Even if you think that residential rental agreements are perfectly free and voluntary, that’s irrelevant to the fact that landlords do not produce or provide anything.

I didn’t throw anything back at you. I’m checking in with you to see if you’re still having trouble and, if so, where.

You won’t understand the solution until you understand the problem. I’ve already explained to you how landlords are parasitic. For similar reasons so are employers and land owners. The wealth they accumulate as owners of private property is not from any labor that they do themselves, but rather the labor of workers. To be clear, I’m not using the term parasitic pejoratively. I’m just being objective. Yes, workers produce housing today because that is how housing is produced, but landlords and their ilk are just overhead to housing production. If you still don’t understand, then please explain why you think that landlords are indispensable.

You are referring to private employers and landowners who are also parasitic and non-essential to housing production.

The answer, which should be obvious, is that workers produce housing. How do you insert landlords into that process in a way that isn’t parasitic?