this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2025
282 points (99.3% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

14013 readers
424 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article

--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 1 points 51 minutes ago

Nothing will meaningfully improve until the rich fear for their lives

[–] vane@lemmy.world 10 points 5 hours ago

We're chickens stuck inside investors slaughterhouse.

[–] W3dd1e@lemmy.zip 30 points 12 hours ago

I get letters from realtors asking me to sell mine to their “client”. I’m sure they are investors so they can fuck off. I’ll take less money to make sure a family gets my house when sell.

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 64 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Poor people can't buy homes and those investors are the same people who make everyone else poor.

[–] Hayduke@lemmy.world 48 points 17 hours ago (1 children)
[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 11 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (2 children)

This isn't the rich, that's what makes it so sad. These funds are managed by vultures, yes, but these portfolios are quickly bundled and turned into financial instruments, which in turn portions of them are rolled into other funds, which in turn are sold to groups like teachers pension funds, or fractions sold on Robinhood using fancy names that disguise what is in them. These funds are sold not to the rich but to those trying to stay ahead of the meat grinder that is the American capitalist economy. The rich get fees that are completely divorced from how well the funds perform, meanwhile working folk are inadvertently funding and fueling the machine that is making it impossible for them to afford to buy a home.

[–] mriormro@lemmy.zip 25 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

I don't think you understand.

EAT.

THE

RICH.

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 12 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, that too, but my complaint is about the system that makes the rich while simultaneously convincing us to inadvertently participate in and strengthen our own economic slavery.

[–] llama@lemmy.zip 3 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

That's by design though. They get rich off selling us the promise of something being the next frontier of personal sovereignty.

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 hours ago
[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Should 10x property taxes on non-primary-residences, and split the proceeds between subsidizing construction of new housing and being distributed as a UBI. Would be better than trying to ban speculative investment in housing outright, because it would be attacking the underlying market factors instead of telling investors they can't try to make a profit.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 3 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

not only that, place limits on how many properties they can own as well, plus also close loopholes like using LLC / some kind of other shady company to buy more houses.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

That's closer to trying to ban speculative investment. I guess my opinion on this is just that this type of approach won't work as well, because keeping people from participating in the market isn't a direct way to move the market. And what needs to happen is, lower housing prices and regular people having greater proportional purchasing power, so the best focus would be to give investors strong incentives to sell, increase supply, and redistribute wealth, in a way that's easy to enforce.

[–] stringere@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 hours ago

Houses should be for living in, not financial vehicles.

[–] magiccupcake@lemmy.world 5 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

While these investors are absolutely soulless and deserve to be called out, there's another aspect of this problem that I feel doesn't get talked about enough.

If we just built enough housing this problem would go away. And it would be easy if we had a system that allowed people to build new things and undercut competition. But we can't because regulations make it nearly impossible to make anything other than houses.

People investing on houses are a symptom of the larger overall problem, of there not being enough fucking housing.

[–] Best_Jeanist@discuss.online 6 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

No. Nobody needs a Bitcoin to live, and Bitcoins are still expensive. We have more houses than we need, and housing is expensive. That's because they're both being used as ponzi schemes.

[–] magiccupcake@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

That's kinda exactly my point? If someone could print a fuckton of new bitcoins it's value would drop. The same is true for housing. We may have technically enough housing for everyone, but that means nothing if that housing is not also where people want to or need to live.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 5 points 10 hours ago

zoning laws, and NIMBYism by rich people are the problem. i think moreso with nimbyism.

[–] rapchee@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

blow the bubble