this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2026
1238 points (99.0% liked)
Political Memes
12742 readers
1305 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
1) Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
2) No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
3) Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
4) No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
5) No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So you'd put a mixed group of poor and uneducated people in the same place?
What a great idea. I can't possibly imagine how that could produce any unintended outcomes.
Those idiots in the government right?
No, I'd put a group of educated/uneducated, poor/wealthy, native/immigrant, ... people in the same place.
Educated and wealthy people don't want to live in these places. I think that's obvious.
Like everybody else, they don't want to live in ghettos. If there are no ghettos, nobody has to.
Ghettos are not built, they are a result of segregating poor/uneducated/... people into certain areas. If there is no segregation and people from all demographics live in the same area, ghettos do not form and everybody can live in a nice neighborhood.
God this is tedious.
If you spread the houses around and make them normal houses then they're no longer low cost houses, they're just houses.
We can't build a free house for everyone because of the reasons already stated.
Strawman: Nobody is asking for free houses for everyone.
The point in the OP is: In the past we were able to house n% of the population while working less and with much worse technolgoy. So why can't we house more than n% now if we work more and have much better technology?
There are obviously multiple factors here. More people want to live in big cities, which can only expand so much. Living standards have increased, so building new houses is more expensive.
But investors are also expecting more profits from their housing investments. I don't know the situation in Australia, but in Germany the largest owners of big city houses barely build anything. They buy existing houses, which are often many decades old, and raise the rent. They make double digit profits with that business model while adding zero value to society.
This means tenants often need 50% or even more of their income for rent while building the exact same houses was payed for with only 30% of their tenants income. There are well-off people who could afford new, big houses in the country, but because they live in the city they qualify for social benefits so they can pay rent.
Again, ghettos are not defined by building quality. If only poor people live in a neighborhood of premium houses, you still have a ghetto. And if a diverse group of people from all demographics live next to each other, you won't have a ghetto even if they all live in budget houses.
Exactly what I've been saying as nauseum. It's a supply problem that can't be fixed with money.
You don't do segregation at all, it's that simple.
UK council houses, until the 1950s when they started building ghettos basically, were just interspersed into the middle of normal housing estates, completely indistinguishable, like 1 in every 10 houses
As I said in my other comment:
They're not just low cost, they're none-profit, that's the point
The only thing is that if you get too much income, they'll kick you out and pass it on to someone who needs it more
Well, they used to, then Thatcher introduced "Right to Buy", as a way to destroy the council housing system cause she was Tory scum, which is "if you live in a council house for 10 years you may buy it"