• njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    That may be the first thing he said that I agree with him on ever.

  • Lad@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Comrade Starmer lmao

    He’s right though. I’d very much like a PM to take a hard line on these chuckle fucks.

    • blackn1ght@feddit.ukOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      9 hours ago

      He definitely is. It’s refreshing to finally even hear this sentiment from our government. However it’s just words, hopefully we start seeing some positive changes in the rental and housing market.

  • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    9 hours ago

    I don’t know why they seem to think they are. Yes some landlords do labor, but that labor is to maintain and improve value of their income from owning things.

  • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Well I remember when I used to rent I don’t remember my landlord ever doing anything. He owns the property but he certainly didn’t maintain it.

  • HumanPenguin@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    edit-2
    12 hours ago

    And, as everyone here says. He is correct. It is an investment. Not work. Yes you are taking a risk, that is the point. If you work, you should not be taking a risk. But instead paid for your labour.

    Unfortunately, saying it here doesn’t matter. Papers like the telegraph and other Tory press are not going to care about the facts. They only care about creating division.

    More importantly, Starmer et al. Are also not going to make the effort to argue this case. No effort is going to be made to push forward the true difference between working class income and actual investment income.

    Anyone watching saw this argument starting during the election. It was clear then when labour started talking about working taxes. The Tories instantly started arguing that the Tories were talking about not raising taxers at all. Anyone watching saw this discussion forming.

    And Starmer et al. intentionally ignored it rather than draw attention to the difference. They will not bother to fight the terminology now either.

      • granolabar@kbin.melroy.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        12 hours ago

        In a country like UK… He just pissed off a lot of parasites.

        And thats a good thing! They got too comfortable over last 40 years.

        UK is fucking gutted from within, and peasants accept it lol

        • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          He’s a self serving neoliberal who doesn’t give two fucks about the working class.

          He has made it clear all along that he is nothing but a corporate and establishment shill, and while making this one accidentally accurate statement about landlords, his party is planning to, for example, go ahead with pretty much the exact same cuts and abuses (E: like the government having unlimited access to the bank accounts of all benefits claimants) that the Tories had planned for the poorest in society, along with trying to force as many sick and disabled people in to work as they can (without providing any more support or income to help this happen of course, just more punishment for those who can’t “refuse”). Landlords will not be getting any of the same treatment.

          His statement doesn’t reflect any moral leanings, nor a will or intent to change anything for the better.

  • ynazuma@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    70
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    That is correct. They might work, but in context they are not “working people”

    Here “working people” is synonymous with “working class”. Thus, not landlords and shareholders obviously

    • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I’m curious about your definition of shareholder; what if I owe £80 worth of fractional shares in an app-based investment service? Does that make me a shareholder?

      • ynazuma@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 hours ago

        It’s not my definition. It is the definition that is being used in context in the article. Read it before commenting

        The definition being used is proper and common in modern usage.

  • Hossenfeffer@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Of course they’re not working people. They are leveraging capital to give them an income. That is not the same as chopping wood and carrying water.

  • kitnaht@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    14 hours ago

    I mean, he’s right. The whole point of my mother leveraging her home to become a landlord back then was because she had a stroke and literally could-not-work. Landlords aren’t working class. They’re just investors.

  • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Good fucking luck to any landlord looking to be named in a manifesto.

    You might get mentioned. You won’t like how.

  • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Yeah, Starmer is right though…

    By definition if you make all the money you need to live from investments like stocks, bonds, or leasing out homes then you aren’t working class. If you work a regular job, but have some additional income from investment savings you are working class, but the Labour government isn’t having to focus on those investments going up as much as making your working life more comfortable.