• boreengreen@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    But what if we let the children pay for it when they grow up? Yes, the cost will be several orders of magnitude more, but we don't have to think about that now.

    • ANGRY_MAPLE@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean, hopefully fewer people from the future generation will be homeless. It's pretty rough starting out now, especially if you aren't lucky enough to have a wealthy family.

      What we've been doing for the last number of years just isn't working. The solution isn't to keep procrastinating it indefinitely. There has always been debt that's pushed onto future generations, but this debt might actually help them.

      I wish that people started building more housing many years ago. If housing was cheaper, increased taxes wouldn't be as big of a concern. This is because there would also be more money available to spend. This means spending money for food, transportation, schooling, and more.

      Instead, currently many people are using the limited housing as investments and retirement plans. Life expectancies are increasing, and births are still happening. Where do you propose people live if there isn't housing available?

      Rural forests in uninhabited areas also aren't a legitimate option for most people. No running water, no heat, no medical care available, no pharmacies, no stores, no places to work, and nowhere to buy tools to build shelter. That sounds like a very bad time for most people.