• dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ownership. You will not own your apartment, it will be owned by your landlord and you will pay him whatever he demands. You will not own the forest, either. The state will, or some private entity will. No trespassing.

    • J4g2F@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      You can still own and buy appartements in most places in the world. Then there are many forms of social housing.

      Rent to own is also a possibility but not seen in most countries.

      Seems your problem is not ownership but landlords.

      Some countries in Europe have the right to roam on any land. State owned and private owned. (Maybe more countries somewhere else have it to but I don’t know)

      It does not need to be so terrible. In some places it just is because of profits

      • neatchee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Owning an apartment and owning land are wildly different. The housing structure alone is not the entirety of home ownership.

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          Since we’re just talking hypotheticals anyway, let’s say in the second image the land is actually owned by the owners of the apartments, like a co-op.

          • neatchee@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s still not ownership. That’s co-ownership. I’m not free to do what I want with it, when I want.

            Same reason I hate HOAs

            • hypelightfly@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I own my house and don’t have an HOA. Guess what?

              Still can’t do whatever I want with it when I want. Still need to get permits and follow local/state regulations.

              • jj4211@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                1 year ago

                But those regulations tend to be more sane.

                Oh, you planted zoysia grass and maintain it well? That’s “inharmonious” , you need to tear that out and plant fescue.

                You don’t have a maple tree of at least 8 feet in height in a particular spot in your yard? Inharmonious again, you need to buy a tree, can’t wait for a sapling to grow.

                Your driveway has dirt on it? You must get it pressure washed.

                You want to park your vehicle in your driveway? It better not have any branding from a company on it, or it better not be an older car or any pickup truck, those are too ugly for our precious neighborhood.

                Regulations tend to be “don’t make fire hazards”, or “don’t block streets”, generally you can’t get a regulation on the books without an actual rationale behind it.

            • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              The vast majority of places where you own a house, you still can’t do whatever you want.

              • jj4211@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Whatever reasonable thing you want will tend to fly though. Versus HOA which often dictate crazy restrictions.

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

                  Which would be less of a problem if there were more housing stock.

                  But also, we need regulations on HOAs.

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

      Yeah that’s my main concern. Also less space to store things like my bike.

      Then there’s the upstairs neighbors. Like I get that the kids are loud. But also could the kids stop throwing stuff at my bird feeder. And their upstairs neighbors flooded the dang place

      • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        There is no such thing as universal right to roam in the US. Likewise, apartment ownership (we call them “condos” when you can own one rather than rent) exists here, but by far is the minority option in multi-family housing. You can claim you want to buy a condo or apartment as much as you want, but that doesn’t do you any good when no one is selling. Units are built to be rented which is a recurring revenue stream, which big capital likes a lot more.

        The significant problem is not that nobody is whacking out slabs of apartment housing fast enough. The issue is that our underlying capitalist system is fucked, and a simple anti-car attitude is not going to fix that.