This is like saying "tech employees don't raise rents, landlords raise rents in response to tech employees offering their fat salaries" - it's a distinction without a difference and the end result is what people object to.

▲

betterunix2 an hour ago | parent [-]

OK, let's take that example. It is true -- landlords are responsible for raising rents, and they do so in response to demand for housing. In some places, landlords are not allowed to arbitrarily raise rents -- for example, by limiting rent increases to follow the CPI. In theory you could regulate utility rates to insulate communities from the impact of DCs and other industrial operations.

Like I said, it is a nitpick and there are bigger problems here.

▲

ForHackernews 36 minutes ago | parent [-]

> you could regulate utility rates to insulate communities from the impact of DCs and other industrial operations.

Yes, that's what the politicians in question are proposing.

	▲	datsci_est_2015 21 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		This reminds me of the short-form video (Daily Show?) I saw recently of a man in a red hat insisting that the government should facilitate union workers increasingly gaining ownership of the companies and corporations they work for. You know, like workers seizing the means of production. But then in the next breath condemning the concept of socialism. But probably because JD Vance himself has redefined socialism to mean forcing girls to play with boys in sports.