site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 15, 2024

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

5
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Hmm, so their parents have to sell their home, and then... Buy another, or rent, reducing or eliminating the gains? Move in with the kids? Or take out a HELOC get right back in debt again (why not just buy a house at that point)? Big banks are advertising rates of nearly 10% for helocs. This all sounds pretty shit, I can't blame Canadians for being upset.

Yes, if you have siblings, your parents have an above average number of children and you are probably not coming out ahead in this system, but the average Canadian does.

The average Canadian is not benefitting from boomers' property values going to the moon because the only way they benefit from their parents' property ownership is:

  1. Parents die and you have no siblings and you're young enough to benefit from the windfall
  2. Parents get into debt and possibly destroy their equity to tap into the house (at which point you are no better off than the Indians stepping off the plane)
  3. Parents sell, at which point you can't afford an equivalent house anyway because they need somewhere to live too

Only option 1 results in a young Canadian family having a house comparable to their parents when they were a young family. If your parents had you young or multiple children, tough luck.

I think you're imagining someone with a greater future housing need than what they have already paid for while my point is that Canadians, on average own more housing than what they need. This necessarily true because of the fact that homeowners and landlords are disprortionately Canadian while renters are disproportionately foreigners.

The boomers also have parents who own or owned property they inherited part of and they also own investment properties or REITs.

You thought that I was unreasonable for bringing up siblings because the median Canadian doesn't have siblings, but you are bringing up investment properties as if the median Canadian stands to inherit investment properties.

At least in the US REITs are a garbage investment next to the S&P.

The median Canadian does have siblings. My point was actually that the average (not median) Canadian doesn't have enough siblings and does own enough property such that he comes out ahead.