this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2024
404 points (94.9% liked)

World News

38987 readers
2064 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Three years ago, lawyer Jordan van den Berg was an obscure TikTok creator who made videos that mocked real estate agents.

But today the 28-year-old is one of the most high-profile activists in Australia.

Posting under the moniker Purple Pingers, Mr van den Berg has been taking on the nation's housing crisis by highlighting shocking renting conditions, poor behaviour from landlords, and what he calls government failures.

It is his vigilante-style approach - which includes helping people find vacant homes to squat in, and exposing bad rentals in a public database - that has won over a legion of fans.

Some have dubbed him the Robin Hood of renters.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If a squatter is squatting somewhere you want to live, sure, yeah, you can't live there. Just like you can't live there if someone else is already renting it.

The way you're describing it, it seems like to you there's no functional difference between someone paying to live in a property you want, vs. squatting in a property you want. You're looking through your own personal lense only, and consider things that inconvenience you as "evil". It's a prime example of the "fuck you I got mine" mentality.

[–] andrewta@lemmy.world -3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

No if they are paying the person who holds the title to be in there, then there is no squatting. That is legal usage. The title holder gave permission for the user to be there for a given period of time. Big difference between renting and squatting

[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

But the inconvenience to you is the same, and that seems to be the thing you have a problem with.

You're taking issue with squatting, even though the effect on you is exactly the same as someone legally renting - ie, you can't occupy that property. So what's the big deal? How does a squatter steal from you, and a renter doesn't? If the only difference is some legal definitions, maybe the two aren't that different after all.

[–] andrewta@lemmy.world -5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If you haven't figured it out by now I'd say that's by choice not because you don't understand.

One is someone living there with permission (renter) one is there without permission(Squatting). Squatting is theft. Have a nice day. I'm out.

[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 months ago

Thanks, you have a good one too