Comments by "test143000" (@test143000) on "City Beautiful" channel.

Not true. In the USSR people can own a home and even a unit and sell it. People don't own a land as there was no private ownership for land. People owned a building. I think this has some similarities with the leasehold in the UK. Most of the units belonged to the state and people rented them virtually free but there was a waiting list. For those who didn't want to wait or wanted a better unit there were "cooperativnoe" units which costed around 3-5 average annual income (after tax). People usually paid for these units in installments in 5-10 years (there was no interest on the loan)/ Most of the free standing houses were privately owned.Owning a weekender (dacha) on a 600 sq m parcel of land was also pretty common in the USSR.
1
@Fenus4 You are missing the point. People owned a building but not land. The only land owner in the USSR was the state. This made it easy for the state to reclaim the land to expand cities. People were not compensated for the loss of land as they didn't own the lot a house was built on. After 1991 the state transferred ownership.
1
@Fenus4 Please read the USSR Constitution. The USSR Constitution (any of the three 1924, 1936, 1977) forbid private land owning. The USSR Constitution couldn’t be overruled by any law, decree or Act. Your family didn't own the land at least up to 1993 when Russia initiated privatization. Your family didn't sell the land. They sold the right to rent this land. The state didn't have to compensate you for the land. The state never compensated the land for people from Cheremuski and other Moscow suburbs that were villages before 1960s. So please stop spreading this misinformation. You know nothing about capitalism.
1
@Fenus4 After putting your foot in your mouth you developed a pretty interesting theory - there was no law in the USSR. According to you the USSR Constitution was not upheld by the state. Do you still wonder why USSR failed?
1