Not really, no. Housing isn’t a commodity, and independent housing shouldn’t be treated as a necessity for most people. Both of these can be true. Multi-generational family homes or compounds genuinely do benefit both the individual and the family greatly, allowing actual social mobility even in capitalist hellscapes. When your rent is 1/10th of your income because you’re splitting it with a half dozen other income earners, you have enough money to save, or to spend, or to do anything you want with it, including expanding your compound so you have more privacy as your own personal life grows.
No one should have to live in an independent home, but it’s also not something that is needed or should be encouraged for the vast majority of people. Collectivism is the only reason you or any of us are alive. It is the only reason society exists. Individualism is inherently anti-human, and a poison to everything built by humans.
Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 1 week ago
I’m not saying multigenerational housing is a bad thing, I’m just saying it should be the only option for a lot of people who would prefer to have their own space. I’m in a multi-generational household myself and it has its benefits and faults.
You shouldn’t be forced to live that way because it’s you’re only option though
marxismtomorrow@lemmy.today 1 week ago
Sure but setting it back to the default, and advocating it needs to go back to being the default, shouldn’t be seen as conservative or racist or whatever group you were trying to associate with it.
If it were the default then affordable apartments would exist again out of necessity, as there would simply be so much less demand the price would have to trend towards the actual cost.