Ideally houses that aren’t used by anyone would be cared for collectively, and would be free for anyone to use for as much time as they need it.
That assumes that housing is a human right, and that adequate housing exists with a small surplus in most societies (and considering there are more empty homes than there are homeless in the US right now, that would be a feasible thing to achieve were capitalism bit creating intense conflicts if interests).
SendMePhotos@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Real question, do we have a surplus if we take out community housing options like apartments? Would everyone be able to have their own house?
ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 1 week ago
Dense community housing would still be optimal for cities and towns, especially if housing was a human right, as it’s much more efficient and uses less resources. They would still exist as cooperative housing, where each tenant owns a share of the complex. Those already exist today quite successfully, they’re just not the norm as it doesn’t generate profit for a landlord or realestate investor.