Even with the fine, it's still financially advantageous for the landlord. They'll make that $100k back in about four years (accounting for taxes) given the extra $700 they're pulling in per tenant. Then they'll just make an extra $2800/month ad perpetuum. There really needs to be greater repercussions for actions like these.
Thankfully no longer the case according to his Patreon account:
I'D CRANK YOUR HOG AND YOUR DOG'S HOG BROTHER
I see you're familiar with the Two Santas strategy. Link for those not familiar, and you really need to be familiar.
Let's pretend there are only $100 in our imaginary economy which buys and sells a limited supply of 100 bricks at $1/brick. You ask to borrow $50 to buy 50 bricks, so a lender loans you $50, to be repaid with 10% interest. You work and are paid from the other $50 owned by others. Eventually, you pay back $55 (due to interest). There's still only $100 in the economy throughout this exercise, just the relative proportions owned by people change.
Alternately, the government prints that $50 and gives it to you (this is a gross oversimplification of quantitative easing). Now there are $150 in the system. The brick sellers know the government has done this and that you have more money, so they bump up their prices to $1.50 simply because they want the most money possible. $1 now buys less, 33.3% less.
Sub Rosa always gets my nacelles humming and ready to warp.
How did you react when you found out you won?
How about making their city have more pet capybaras per capita than anywhere else in the United States?
Not yet, but don't give them any ideas!
Let's become Quakers and refuse to pay war taxes.
A nuanced and informed opinion... on the Internet?! Very nice, a perfect 5/7.
130
Right-to-Work Laws don't mean your employer can fire you at any time for any reason (US Law)
(lemmy.blahaj.zone)