unlike the US, where working conditions for the poor are fantastic?
Don't get me wrong, France (and the EU) has its share of problems. But "better protections for their workers" is not one of them. EU countries decided to use a small portion of their enormous wealth building a safety net and decent worker protections. The US does this to a much lesser degree, preferring instead to center corporate profits and the wealthy.
Even if all of these were true (I would describe most of them as a mischaracterization at best), do you honestly think that outweighs everything that I described? The worst thing that people can say about unions is they are bureaucratic and inconvenient. The worst things people can say about, say, working conditions in many non-unionized American workplaces are far, far worse. People dying, unfairly losing their job (and healthcare, and home), working incredibly long hours, unable to see their kid, unable to get adequate sleep, etc etc etc. I happen to think there are values other than "workers producing profit for their employers as efficiently as possible at the expense of anything else"
> unintended consequence is that it also facilitates exploitation of software developers by big corporations who from the perspective of FSF are just users as regular people.
Sure, but rms has nothing but pure comtempt for every big corporation and their approach to software. The only difference is the FSF doesn't have influence over big tech the way it does over hobbyists. This isn't a condemnation of the FSF, but of its marginal position. An alternative perspective is that the principles of the FSF are good, and should be enshrined in law and regulation, much like other freedoms are. We shouldn't make FOSS software less free, we should make big tech software more free.
I mean sure, if the "failed policies" are opposing US imperialism in Latin America, inviting a huge backlash of sanctions, several US-sponsored coups, etc.
There’s nothing wrong with renting, I support strong, high quality, inexpensive public housing. I don’t support private landlords and the commodification of housing.
What kind of housing someone can afford is a political question. Our current answer to it is that this should be resolved through market mechanisms, which creates high prices alongside scarcity
Property management is work. Owning property is not. For small scale landlords, this is often the same person, and they may do a lot of property management.
What "working class" person owns investment property in NYC? They amount of capital required to do that is so enormous that the article calling them "working class" is deeply misleading. They certainly aren't working class in the way that most NYC tenants are.
I believe in a world in which housing is a public good and a human right, so that no one would have to rent from anyone else in order to have access to housing. In this world, housing would cease to be a profitable investment vehicle, and thus landlordism would no longer exist.
Could I "enter in a contract" to lease "land that I own" in a national park? No, because national parks are a public good that everyone shares in their ownership and right to access. Housing should be the same way.
I don't care about "enforcing contracts" as an abstract concept. If a contract is unjust, there is no reason it should be enforced. A contract that forces someone to pay $X a month or face homelessness during a huge economic crisis is not a just contract.
Cea Weaver, who is used as a foil and whose perspective is unfairly maligned in this article, is basically 100% correct. Landlordism should not exist. Housing is a human right and should not be an investment commodity.
> Emergency policies enacted in times of crisis are prone to becoming permanent, which some members of the #CancelRent movement say is the goal.
This is a good thing. The COVID crisis has exacerbated the huge inequalities in housing in the US, and now is a better time than ever to fix things.
That's a rather bold assertion -- can you cite any statistics or surveys?
In some limited sense, they may "choose" homelessness over poor shelter conditions or unaffordable housing, but that can hardly be considered a choice.
You and your work are not an island. My productivity is not just my own, I am aided by mentors, supported by smart teammates, etc. I find your hyper individualist mindset very depressing and isolating. I think it would be foolish to claim that any success or talent of mine or my team is solely my own. I believe in social obligations, not just in the context of work, but in general. My goal is not to maximize my personal salary, but to live in a world that is more humane and more just and treats everyone, including myself, with dignity and respect.
> Do you share a bank account with them? Why not?
No, because I don’t have a pension, but many people do and I am fully in support of the concept.
What is even wrong with the world you are describing? I would much rather live in a world of more flat compensation, where I don’t have to worry about negotiating a salary, where there are more rigid worker protections, etc. I don’t see myself as better or more deserving than my coworkers, I see us all as on the same team, with the same basic interests.
Don't get me wrong, France (and the EU) has its share of problems. But "better protections for their workers" is not one of them. EU countries decided to use a small portion of their enormous wealth building a safety net and decent worker protections. The US does this to a much lesser degree, preferring instead to center corporate profits and the wealthy.