"ackshually, you need to define the term exploit, this is just a semantic question"
Or "ackshually, not being tethered down is good, because I can move - I like moving all the time."
Or the more honest but naive "some people can't afford to replace a roof or a downpayment so it's good that renting is a thing"
But my favorite is this response to a comrade making a good point about profit being exploitative:
"So the issue I see with this argument is >that it necessarily applies to all products >that sell for above the cost of materials >(and maybe some labor?).
"That seems fine, but then literally all >products/services are exploitative (and >pricing labor gets tricky and can become >exploitative on either end unless it is priced >perfectly)."
<liberal voice> If it were exploitative to extract the surplus of someone else's labor through profit, then there would be no ethical consumption under capitalism
I like how in the last response the answer is literally right there but they can't make the logical conclusion because that would invalidate their entire worldview, and THAT can't be allowed so the logic has to be flawed somehow. Sticking your head in the sand is very standard lib response though, so shouldnt be surprised.
It seems that all the answers are either:
"ackshually, you need to define the term exploit, this is just a semantic question"
Or "ackshually, not being tethered down is good, because I can move - I like moving all the time."
Or the more honest but naive "some people can't afford to replace a roof or a downpayment so it's good that renting is a thing"
But my favorite is this response to a comrade making a good point about profit being exploitative:
You're so close buddy, so close.
<liberal voice> If it were exploitative to extract the surplus of someone else's labor through profit, then there would be no ethical consumption under capitalism
I like how in the last response the answer is literally right there but they can't make the logical conclusion because that would invalidate their entire worldview, and THAT can't be allowed so the logic has to be flawed somehow. Sticking your head in the sand is very standard lib response though, so shouldnt be surprised.
Amazing watching someone bootstrap 95% of the logic underlying the basic problem like that and not get it
Love to not know whether I will have a place to live in 6 months from now