I fully get the issues with landlords in terms of coasting off of other people's labor and in general being parasitic. My question is, the resistance I get when I say that someone shouldn't profit off of another person's need for housing is that they bring up grocery stores/ restaurants profiting off of a person's need for food. And I don't really know how to address or answer that. Just wondering if someone can close the loop for me!
Both of these things provide something from adding labour to the equation. They do work. The landlord does not do work. The landlord exploits via ownership of property and nothing else. He didn't build the property. The property exists without him.
The groceries do not exist without the grocery store. The grocery store is a necessity. The landlord is not.
The owner of the grocery store though? He can fuck off too. He's not a necessity just like the landlord.