• abbotsbury@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    What difference would it make for you?

    Well, paying an at-cost price would mean it is inherently cheaper as the government wouldn’t be trying to turn a profit, merely charge an amount that compensates for upkeep.

    Many of these mortgages are government funded anyway.

    But is still building equity for a private individual.

    my government is far more inept and corrupt than any landlord I’ve ever dealt with

    I have a say in my government though, at least theoretically. I think housing (at least primary housing) shouldn’t be a for-profit industry, so I advocate against it via my government.

    • Morcyphr@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      the government wouldn’t be trying to turn a profit

      lol.

      But is still building equity for a private individual.

      With risk attached, yes.

      I think housing (at least primary housing) shouldn’t be a for-profit industry

      Agreed. Nor should food, water, electricity, health services, etc. but here we are.