(no title)
salmonellaeater | 2 years ago
The article seems to be making an argument against privately rented homes and in favor of social housing. Would eliminating private renting actually reduce biological ageing? Or are the people who are predisposed to living a stressful life with fast ageing more likely to choose privately rented homes, and taking away that option wouldn't actually help them?
lawlessone|2 years ago
Gigachad|2 years ago
The rental laws in my state are also quite good and continuously getting better.
diogenes4|2 years ago
Why would people living stressful lives choose to rent? That makes no sense—generally speaking, people don't like renting and generally speaking it's more affordable to pay off a mortgage than it is to pay off someone else's.
throwaway290|2 years ago
Do you like buying houses with money you don't have?
lm28469|2 years ago
They live stressful lives because they're running after money
> it's more affordable to pay off a mortgage
Most people can;t afford mortgage. In most places they'll rent you a $500/month place but won't let you take a mortgage for $500/month. Not even taking into account current interest rates
quantified|2 years ago
A relative few people think it's financially better to rent than to own so they can deploy their capital elsewhere. These folks have a lot more capital to play with in the first place, and would likely be part of the group that rents but lives longer.