• 0 Posts
  • 127 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: February 27th, 2025

help-circle
  • only 9% of residential housing is owned by corporate entities. corporations are no sizable impact on housing prices in the market at large. 91% of homes are owned by individuals.

    First off stop looking at all home ownership and the percentage owned by corporations as that does not dictate pricing as a whole, you should be looking at what percentage of houses that are being purchased over that past few years are owned by investors. Those new purchases and homes that trade hands are what drive the cost of a home. Most of that 91% is not continously buying and selling, they are holding on for long term and even passing on properties to their kids. The corporate entities on the other hand are buying up surplus real estate to drive the pricing of the market as there is very little liquidity in the housing market when you compare it too the shear total amount of residential properties in existence.

    A good way to determine what percentage of the housing surplus (the real liquidity in the market that drives the price as a whole) is owned by corporate entities would be to look at different data points. Like say what percentage of vacant homes are owned by corporate entities. Here you get much more staggering figures like the fact that corporate entities own over 50% of vacant residential properties.

    Take exhibit a:

    Investors owned more than 882,300 vacant houses as of last year’s third quarter, according to the latest report from ATTOM Data Solutions.

    And exhibit b:

    it’s a major portion of the nearly 1.4 million total residential properties that had no occupants at the end of September 2024

    Source: https://nationalmortgageprofessional.com/news/investors-hold-most-empty-houses

    Now corporations holding over 50% of the liquid market of housing is a much more substantial fact here and highlights how they are controlling the market as a whole to drive prices up for their benefit while pricing the average person out of ownership market and into the rental market.

    Now that we can see they DO control a majority of the liquidity of the housing market lets also see what percentage of rentals are owned by corporate entities as well.

    So lets actually brake down your little 9% figure and explain why its a terrible metric that obscures reality and is just also misleading, as you seem to think 9% of residential properties being owned by corporations means on 9% of residential housing is owned by corporations.

    I am going to be using US rental housing stats from 2020: https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R47332

    First we have:

    There were 19.3 million rental properties, 85.6% of which were single unit properties.

    Ok so first we can see that a lot of residential rental properties are single unit properties. Over 85%. But how does that actually relate to the amount of units available for people to rent and does that meam that your little 9% of properties could be hiding the real kicker that corporations own most of the actual residential rental unit supply?

    There were 49.5 million rental units, 33.4% of which were located in single unit properties and 33.1% of which were located in properties with 150 units or more. The remaining third of units were located in properties with between 2 and 149 units.

    Oh so its does hide the fact that most of the rental units available are in multi-unit properties. So while 85% of all residential properties are single family unit rentals, that 85% only covers about a 1/3 of the rental market, with the rest of the market being dominated by multi unit properties.

    Hmm well surely since you seem to think owning 9% of properties is small and irrelevant to the housing and rental market that must mean that most of those multi unit properties must also be owned by individuals and not corporations right?

    Individual investors owned 37.6% of rental units

    Hm I guess not. I guess while single family units make up 85% of the properties it turns out most rental units are in those massive multi unit properties. Meaning just shy of 2/3rds of the rental unit market is owned by corporations.

    So lets recap here shall we.

    Corporations own over 50% of the liquidity in the residential housing sphere so they have a massive influence on the pricing of houses on the market.

    Corporations also own nearly 2/3rds of the rental market supply when you amount for units instead of just properties. Also granting them the ability to have a massive influence on the rental price market.

    So yeah your right corporations may only own 9% of residential land across the US, that completely hides the ugly truth that they control the market by dominating the liquidity which underpines the pricing of housing market for ownership and also obscures the fact that on that 9% of land they have so many multi-unit properties that they own nearly 2/3rds of all rental units allowing them to control the pricing in the rental market as well.

    So no the problem is corporate greed in the housing market you are just too willing to listen to corporate propaganda that misrepresents reality by cherry picking what statistics they push out to the public to placate them into feeling like its their neighbors or generic human greed that causes these problems not them.

    Next time before you start acting so stupid maybe actually check the sources and dig into how they got their numbers in the first place to make sure it paints an accurate picture of what you are buying into.


  • I would just follow their advice, download the newest version from their site directly and use the new versions installer to update manually. I would probably do the same thing when the newest version with certificate and signature verification releases, after that I would assume you should be good to go. However its probably also worth scanning your system for malware just incase you updated during the time frame the attack was live.



  • If you think one of your differing opinions/misunderstandings causes everything else that person has said to be invalid when your remark basically implies you agreed up to that point, you really need to take a step back from your tribalism and learn some nuance.

    And to be fair they are not stating that an actors opinions on politics are irrelevant, they are clearly stating they shouldnt be treated as an expert on the matter based on the context of their comment.

    If I am looking for a relevant policy maker and someone with experience in getting policies passed in a government, using an actor, firefighter, musician, dance teach or engineer as anything but a way to gain insight into the area a policy is being written for is generally a dumb idea unless the aforementioned person transitioned from politics into their new field of career.

    I am not going to ask a comedian how to design software, their opinion on my applications design maybe relevant and guide my design philosophy but acting like they would have insight into the best data structures and tech stack to use in order to develop that application would be no better than prompting an LLM write it for me. They arent an expert and shouldn’t be treated as such.

    Its clear thats what the person you replied to was getting at, so maybe take a step back from being so reactionary because it sounds like you probably have some common ground thats being lost due to the medium we are interacting in.


  • Sure but the metrics that companies produce after running an ad campaign to see if it was effective do not depend on those pay per click metrics. They will generally look at what the total sales or total amount of engagement with their content was pre and post the marketing campaign. If the number goes up they call it a success and will pay for another ad campaign. I guess the real question is are ad payouts for sites hosting them still generally based on pay per click or other engagement analytics that run after the campaigns are finished. That I am unsure of


  • So high and mighty of you but we did not have a viable 3rd party candidate that had any sort of reach that they could have won the election.

    We do not have the same system of governance in the US as most of europe does. Like I’m m glad you get more options with ranked choice voting but your plan would have done the same thing here as not voting and left you supporting genocide no matter how you want to try and spin it in your head.

    At least had we gotten a democrat president, challenges from the courts could of helped put pressure and had we at least had someone who is not threatening death to those who oppose them we could have worked from a local and state level government to apply pressures to the federal gov to stop supporting Isreal and their genocide. Now those alternatives are nearly impossible as none of the politicians here want to be the ones who start a civil war and get our civilians slaughtered by the US military generating more body counts than what we have already seen in Gaza.

    Im getting tired of this high and mighty attitude from Europeans like you when at the same time we all have seen significant rises in fascism and genocide support throughout European nations. I didnt see any of the European countries arresting Netanyahu when he flew through their airspace with an arrest warrant out over the actions of gaza? So europe’s lack of action is just as damning as any country in the west even if you have your own propaganda playing appeasement with stern wording in talks on your news and then a clear lack of follow through when it comes time to actually act.

    So no you dont get to wipe your hands and shift blame from the fact its all of us who haven’t been doing enough. The problem is everyone is getting so tribal no one will work together. You put out opinions and state why aren’t your groups doing more and when pressed about what you are doing that gives you any right to critique the actions others are doing you wipe your hands use your false cop out of well thats your sides fault not mine. So either put your fucking money where your mouth is or fuck right off until you learn how to be beneficial and supportive.

    Stop doing the uber wealthy’s biding of pitting all possible allies against each other with your little nationalist mentality as if prior to trump europe didnt support all this shit by spending and investing in US stocks and technologies funding the exact shit you see today. We are all complicit in one way or another its fucking impossible not to be with such an interconnected global economy and world, so you need to come to grips with that and start helping instead of acting like you’re above everyone else.


  • You need to get people on board first, these small protests show people they arent alone in what they are feeling and that there are people in their area who would be there to help and support for larger events. It allows others to organize and share contact information and grow the movement. Considering almost all social media which has the saturation needed to even allow this to be done online are coopted and owned by the opposition, we need these slow burn style events to make people acclimated to doing this for one and also to help grow numbers to a point bigger more successful action can be effective. While media may misrepresent these as general strikes a more apt description is these a like recruitment drives.





  • Eh it just adds more accessibility to games, it doesnt bother me if someone likes specific parts of a game and not the full package. You may enjoy the challenge aspects but dont find other areas like exploration to be as enticing or for someone else maybe its the opposite. Having the ability to pick and choose what parts of the game you play and allow other parts to essentially be a cutscene doesnt seem like a bad idea. It just means more players can enjoy something. For example I liked eldenring, but I found the boss fights to be a bit to much for me and ended up never finishing the game. I dont have a ton of time to play so having to memorize fighting patterns etc for a drawn out battle just pushed me away from the game. I want to be able to create the character pick my weapons abilities, explore then just do some minor battles that arent going to be me needing to repeat a fighting sequence for 10-20mins. If I had the option to essentially turn the boss fights into cutscenes driven by my weapon choices and skills that I crafted with my character that would be pretty cool and give me more enjoyment possibly enticing me back to the game. While i enjoy puzzles in some games I know some people just want the action, so imagine having something like legend of Zelda and being able to skip the puzzles but take control for fights and exploration. Having the ability to customize the experience of a game just means you can appeal to a wider audience and that is not a bad thing.





  • While shifting might have been engaging for you I don’t believe that’s a blanket statement for everyone.

    I never said it was a blanket statement though, just that there are a lot of people LIKE me who find getting the gear selection right to take a turn optimally, or choose the right shift points to get optimal acceleration for that cars gear ratio to be rewarding and engaging. There is a challenge to that which gives immediate feedback and its fun.

    Personally, I like the linear acceleration that EVs have and the feeling it brings.

    And im glad thats what you like, its awesome when you find what you like rewarding from driving! Just know almost all these shift features are toggles due to them being software based. I.e you can get a ioniq 5n as a drivers car and if you dont prefer dealing with shift points or the sounds you never have to turn that mode on, it will be easy to drive with linear acceleration and give you the engagement you enjoy from driving, for those of us who find timing our shifts and gear selection to get those balanced and fun turns with more room for error we can enable the shift mode and enjoy our preference.

    You see having these modes does not detract from your enjoyment at all and just allows others to enjoy themselves as well.


  • But it’s all fake.

    And all video games are fake, all non fiction movies and books, fake. Just because its fake doesnt mean it cant be enjoyable. I love sim racing in VR, its all fake virtual representations of some thing real, that doesnt take away the enjoyment from it.

    Umberto Ecco wrote a book about the American obsession with second best and fake experiences like the fake Eiffel tower in Vegas and fake Venice in Venice CA.

    People enjoy museums that display recreations of the “real thing” because some people cant afford or dont have the luxury to see the real thing. That doesnt detract from the experience. Planetariums arent just as US thing and people enjoy them across the world even if you are seeing fake visualizations of the galaxy. How is that any different?





  • This is idiotic.

    So im guessing you dont like a drivers car which is what porsche’s market is catered too. If you dont like that its completely fine. But for people like me who enjoy manual cars and having something thats engaging to drive give me an ev that simulates ice vehicle dynamics any day. Seeing this means more people who bought ice cars because they were more engaging for track days might be buying evs in the future. That means less noise pollution near race tracks and a more ecologically friendly motor sport. Calling this idiotic is just a bad take, you’re clearly not the market for a drivers car and that fine but dont act like there arent others out there who are waiting for things like this. I like that the ionic 5n does this behavior and seeing more performance cars take this approach means hopefully a shift in a sport I enjoy but is not ecologically friendly might become more so in the future. Plus I can have all the pops and bangs of an ice engine in my car without having to bother anyone outside it :D