How about a database of slum lords?

so no matter her current financial situation, that should disqualify her by default? interesting.
what do you think about how inaccurate those checks apparently often are, and how they acquire their data? you think that's regulated sufficiently, or should there be some standards to avoid blatant mistakes or racial discrimination?

lol

ok so now apply this thinking to government.
and which party is for big/more government, and which one is not.

Its a pretty clear cut answer.

Imagine thinking R are actually for smaller govt
They just have different priorities
1. Example Military Spending
/end

No party are for smaller government.

republicans are in favour of big government when it comes to subsidising their donors in the fossil fuel industry, banning speech they don't like, preventing minorities from voting, as well as surveilling, arresting, and imprisoning a record number of people...
democrats are in favour of social programs, saving the environment, ending racial / religious discrimination, and protecting the working class against exploitation by corporations...

it's pretty clear whose "big government" is worse...

the moronic notion that "all government is bad" by default is something that think tanks working for billionaires have successfully sold you with cheap advertising tricks. the easiest way to tell someone is fundamentally stupid, and doesn't understand the first thing about politics and economics, is when they uncritically regurgitate such simplistic "libertarian" principles.

This post was edited by fender on Jun 19 2022 03:32pm

Why rent to someone who's filed for bankruptcy when there are plenty of people seeking rentals who have a better risk profile?

Credit record agencies should be regulated better to make it easier for people to fix errors but im not sure how equifax and transunion are discriminating based on race so you'll need to provide some specifics.

that's a "yes" then? her current financial situation is irrelevant and her bankruptcy from eight years ago should disqualify her by default? forever, or should that become irrelevant at some point in your opinion?

regarding the second part: maybe read the article you linked. i'm obviously talking about the tenant screening industry, which apparently is even less regulated than credit score agencies. i mean it's not like racial discrimination doesn't have a long and rich history in that industry, right?

Its certainly not irrelevant, it would depend on willingness to take on the risk by the landlord in question who's considering the data from a tenant database. Would I take her? Probably not, I can afford to wait for someone who hasn't filed for bankruptcy. There are probably other landlords out there who would overlook the bankruptcy and take her in.

The tenant screening industry is well regulated where im from in that this database alone would be illegal. The system is stacked in favour of tenants in my province. I simply like the idea as it would help weed out undesirable tenants and i cant speak to how unfairly this industry treats people in other countries.