• thantik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You’ve obviously never actually lived in one of these places. They regularly have infestations, dirty water, and no heating due to the types of people they house and the “affordable” nature of them which generally causes lack of upkeep once built. Which can be, yes – just as inhumane as living in a tent.

      In addition, it removes the potential for ownership away from the people living there, in an effort to rent-seek and make sure they own nothing for as long as they live.

      • door_in_the_face@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not gonna dox myself here bg linking my adress, but rest assured: I have been living in apartments all my adult life, and it’s been fine. The problems you describe are not inherent to apartments but rather the way landlords handle things. With better regulations and organizations that help renters assert their rights, it can be a good way to house people.

        • thantik@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I agree that we’re incredibly overdue for regulations in these areas. Since the mid 90s it’s been deregulation, privitization, deregulation, privitization. A healthy capitalistic society can only survive with regulations which govern how absolutely atrocious capitalists can be. If they could sell you rat poison as food to make a dollar, they certainly would. My guess is that these kind of apartment complexes are probably better in less city-centric areas where the construction is newer. Unfortunately all I see going up around here is wood-frame apartment complexes, and they are clearly inferior to block/prefab concrete.

        • thantik@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          How is that a yikes? We’re talking about poverty here, it is a class of people which regularly lack the same benefits in society as others, so there’s higher instances of drug use, crime, etc. You know in conversation, it’s occasionally useful to classify things with a broad brush so you can talk about overarching issues and how to solve them without being prejudiced, right?

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not when done properly. Two poorer Eastern European countries have 90+% of their citizens living in government owned housing that costs them 2% of their monthly income. The apartments are modern, well maintained, and preferable to home ownership because 2% rent. IIRC it’s Estonia and Lithuania, but I may be wrong there.