Like why some apartments allow no tenants with pets. Living in an apartment building, some tenants around me absolutely fucking suck with owning pets. Allowing them to bark, wrestle and play loudly, letting them take dumps everywhere and not picking it up. People actually running with their pets with no leashes when leashes are required.

Yeah I side more with apartment offices that have balls to say no pets. Nobody wants the noise.

  • OwenEverbinde@lemmy.myserv.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    When the argument against an initiative says, “greedy developers” that is just a populist NIMBY smear spoken by even greedier, already-existing landlords.

    I actually voted against a housing development one time because I got played by those words. I’m a little wiser now.

      • OwenEverbinde@lemmy.myserv.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        I wouldn’t be surprised if they called developers “terrorists” at some point.

        NIMBY property owners are so convinced of the righteousness of their assets – and of the evil lurking within any effort to slightly slow down their appreciating value – that I don’t think there’s a level of wickedness that exceeds a threat to those assets.

        Like, I wouldn’t be surprised if they thought: “these developers are worse than Bin Laden. At least Bin Laden didn’t decrease the worth of MY property.”