Re:RealPage and landlords illegally created a 'cartel' to se...
by shrthnd on Wednesday November 16, 2022 @08:20PM
(#33633655)
> The complaints claim that by exchanging detailed and “competitively sensitive” information, RealPage and the landlords have illegally created a “cartel” to set prices in violation of antitrust laws.
Why not use the available information to settle any claims and create an equitable relationship moving forward? I would hope/think, both parties would mutually benefit (if renters choose or are otherwise unable to own) when there's enough throughput ("money") passing through the system to support any and all subsystems ("livelihoods") involved. (What happens when there's too much throughput/energy passing through a system? I would liken this to putting high octane fuel in your lawn mower.)
> livelihood 1610s, alteration of livelode "means of keeping alive" (c. 1300), from Old English liflad "course of life," from lif "life" (see life) + lad "way, course" (see load (n.)). Similar formation in Old High German libleita "provisions." Spelling assimilated to words in -hood. Earlier livelihood was a different word, meaning "liveliness," from lively.
The thing is... it's not simply about livelihoods because households IMHO are the economic unit of neighborhoods and communities, which is where property and ownership sort of collide...
> household late 14c., "members of a family collectively (including servants)," also "furniture and articles belonging to a house;" see house (n.) + hold (n.1). As an adjective, "of or pertaining to house and family, domestic," from late 14c. Compare householder. Household word, one that is in very familiar use, is from 1590s; variant household name is from 1862.
So much of modern/present/current discourse is (un)intentionally divisive because it simply doesn't begin from the perspective of, how can we resolve this? what is our shared collective mental model for navigating xyz?
Why not use the available information to settle any claims and create an equitable relationship moving forward? I would hope/think, both parties would mutually benefit (if renters choose or are otherwise unable to own) when there's enough throughput ("money") passing through the system to support any and all subsystems ("livelihoods") involved. (What happens when there's too much throughput/energy passing through a system? I would liken this to putting high octane fuel in your lawn mower.)
> livelihood 1610s, alteration of livelode "means of keeping alive" (c. 1300), from Old English liflad "course of life," from lif "life" (see life) + lad "way, course" (see load (n.)). Similar formation in Old High German libleita "provisions." Spelling assimilated to words in -hood. Earlier livelihood was a different word, meaning "liveliness," from lively.
The thing is... it's not simply about livelihoods because households IMHO are the economic unit of neighborhoods and communities, which is where property and ownership sort of collide...
> household late 14c., "members of a family collectively (including servants)," also "furniture and articles belonging to a house;" see house (n.) + hold (n.1). As an adjective, "of or pertaining to house and family, domestic," from late 14c. Compare householder. Household word, one that is in very familiar use, is from 1590s; variant household name is from 1862.
So much of modern/present/current discourse is (un)intentionally divisive because it simply doesn't begin from the perspective of, how can we resolve this? what is our shared collective mental model for navigating xyz?