Bring back property rights. Pass a law limiting the amount of homes you can own down to one house per person.
This statement is what we call an oxymoron as both of what you are saying is simply not possible. 
Topic: The one law that would bring peace during an Economic Collapse - page 2. (Read 3457 times)
You aren't going to change your view on this matter until you accept for yourself that the government has no power to decide what you spend your money on...
I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. As of right now, government has more power now than in any other time in history. They spend my money by charging taxes on everything from pay parking, to sales taxes, to income taxes, to inflation which is just another form of tax.
If your trying to say that you shouldn't have to pay any taxes I already somewhat agree with you. But, someone has to pay the Military. There are some other departments that are essential. This is why we need to get back to small government.
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington
So the question is, would spilling the blood of patriots and bringing back small government, prevent government from ever getting too big again?
Insanity : Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein
And the answer to that question is, no.
For anyone that says that we have to pay taxes for roads is completely wrong. They should charge that fee when you get car insurance. Someone who walks should not have to pay a road tax.
Bring back property rights. Pass a law limiting the amount of homes you can own down to one house per person.
This is the antithesis of property rights.
Property rights would be the protection of property that is owned, and limiting the number of houses that one can own would restrict what people can use their money (property) to purchase.
First off most property owners have created their fortune from Capitalism. We lost capitalism. Now we deal with so many hoops and red tape that it becomes extremely difficult to start anything up. Government got too big and there are too many bureaucrats trying to justify their jobs that all they do all day is pass more laws. There are zero legit reasons for someone needing to own more then one house. If you buy your friends and family houses then you don't own more than one house. If you pass this law all families will be able to afford one house because owning will be cheaper then renting now. Your rent pays that landlords mortgage. If prices come down then the mortgage payment goes down.
You aren't getting it... It's nobodies business how many houses I or anyone else owns... If I own too many houses that I can't keep up with them then they will likely be lost under adverse possession by squatters...
Why must a person establish a "need" to buy something? Who holds that power over the head of a citizen in our Constitutional Republic? There are massive problems, but your proposed solution would make things much worse.
Here is what I get. Allowing someone to own more the one house is slowly bringing us to Feudalism. Landlords with multiple homes hire property management companies to do the work for them, so that they don't have to take care of them.
The reason why people "need" to buy a house is so that everyone has the opportunity to buy shelter. This makes things better not worse. People that own homes care a lot more about their property then renters. Most renters don't do renovations.
When a person works in a industry (or has a career) that requires him to move around often from city to city then he would spend a lot of money selling his house every time he had to move. Allowing this person to rent his home rather then own it would save him a lot of money in both the short run and the long run.
The same is true when someone wishes to move because of lack of job opportunities in the location that he lives in presently. If a person can move, say 500 miles away because there are job opportunities that do not exist where he lives then he would benefit if he did not have to bear the expense of selling his house.
Real estate agents here typically charge 7% of the sale. I don't see the percentage changing. But I do see real estate agents slowly being phased out with the development of websites that let you house hunt over the internet. You can do virtual tours now.
Most people I know sell their house and buy a new one when they take a job in a new city (or end up commuting). I don't see too many people just buying a place every time they work in a different city. So nothing would change. In the rare case that someone would take say a three month temp job and didn't want to sell and buy they would have to rent. There would still be some homes for rent.
You can use the blockchain to keep a public ledger of who owns which property. This would eliminate notary fees making the buying and selling of deeds to a place a lot easier and cheaper.
Real estate agents are necessary as most people are not good at negotiating and when dealing with this large of a transaction you will want to have someone on your side like this. The average price that real estate agents charge is ~6%
If you were to take out a mortgage when you buy your new house then you would need to pay for closing costs for the new loan. This usually works out to ~2-3% of the loan amount or around 1.6-2.4% if you borrow 80% of the value of the property.
You aren't going to change your view on this matter until you accept for yourself that the government has no power to decide what you spend your money on...
Every law that restricts the use of legal money is unconstitutional, against the grain of morality which this country was founded on, and inconsistent with the natural rights born of freedom.
The government can continue to restrict the liberties of this society until it no longer can. Once the line of public acceptability has been crossed, the recoil will strike like a large rubber band snapping. Those minor impediments on freedom which were acceptable to a great number yesterday would no longer be acceptable tomorrow; even the little things will be seen as unacceptable. When the disdain is great enough that a powerful network effect is formed it always results in a "reset" so to speak...
Those properties which you claim, "belong to the government" will no longer be seen as such. The truth is that the federal government does not own anything. The federal government is a shadow of consenting states. The federal government is an alliance and not a kingdom... The existence of our federal government is an agreement between states and nothing more... All of the land is owned by the state which borders it until the state sells that land to an individual. Once sold, it no longer belongs to the state. The individual is bound to follow the laws of the state and the constitution, but the state has no lawful claim to that land any further. If the individual dies and doesn't leave the property to another individual, the state has the power to reclaim the land under adverse possession as if it were a squatter on the property.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson
Your suggestion is unlawful, immoral, and dangerous.
Nobody "needs" more than one house, but everybody "needs" the power to convert their labor into goods, services, investments however they feel is fit. After an economic collapse, people will see that the banks were stealing by printing fake money and buying real assets. Do you think the people will just let the thieves have everything without attempting to recover it? I think not... The distribution of property will be reset and those banks will own none of it...
If we had a level playing field where no party could just "will" money into existence without value then this wouldn't even be an issue...
Every law that restricts the use of legal money is unconstitutional, against the grain of morality which this country was founded on, and inconsistent with the natural rights born of freedom.
The government can continue to restrict the liberties of this society until it no longer can. Once the line of public acceptability has been crossed, the recoil will strike like a large rubber band snapping. Those minor impediments on freedom which were acceptable to a great number yesterday would no longer be acceptable tomorrow; even the little things will be seen as unacceptable. When the disdain is great enough that a powerful network effect is formed it always results in a "reset" so to speak...
Those properties which you claim, "belong to the government" will no longer be seen as such. The truth is that the federal government does not own anything. The federal government is a shadow of consenting states. The federal government is an alliance and not a kingdom... The existence of our federal government is an agreement between states and nothing more... All of the land is owned by the state which borders it until the state sells that land to an individual. Once sold, it no longer belongs to the state. The individual is bound to follow the laws of the state and the constitution, but the state has no lawful claim to that land any further. If the individual dies and doesn't leave the property to another individual, the state has the power to reclaim the land under adverse possession as if it were a squatter on the property.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson
Your suggestion is unlawful, immoral, and dangerous.
Nobody "needs" more than one house, but everybody "needs" the power to convert their labor into goods, services, investments however they feel is fit. After an economic collapse, people will see that the banks were stealing by printing fake money and buying real assets. Do you think the people will just let the thieves have everything without attempting to recover it? I think not... The distribution of property will be reset and those banks will own none of it...
If we had a level playing field where no party could just "will" money into existence without value then this wouldn't even be an issue...
Bring back property rights. Pass a law limiting the amount of homes you can own down to one house per person.
This is the antithesis of property rights.
Property rights would be the protection of property that is owned, and limiting the number of houses that one can own would restrict what people can use their money (property) to purchase.
First off most property owners have created their fortune from Capitalism. We lost capitalism. Now we deal with so many hoops and red tape that it becomes extremely difficult to start anything up. Government got too big and there are too many bureaucrats trying to justify their jobs that all they do all day is pass more laws. There are zero legit reasons for someone needing to own more then one house. If you buy your friends and family houses then you don't own more than one house. If you pass this law all families will be able to afford one house because owning will be cheaper then renting now. Your rent pays that landlords mortgage. If prices come down then the mortgage payment goes down.
You aren't getting it... It's nobodies business how many houses I or anyone else owns... If I own too many houses that I can't keep up with them then they will likely be lost under adverse possession by squatters...
Why must a person establish a "need" to buy something? Who holds that power over the head of a citizen in our Constitutional Republic? There are massive problems, but your proposed solution would make things much worse.
Here is what I get. Allowing someone to own more the one house is slowly bringing us to Feudalism. Landlords with multiple homes hire property management companies to do the work for them, so that they don't have to take care of them.
The reason why people "need" to buy a house is so that everyone has the opportunity to buy shelter. This makes things better not worse. People that own homes care a lot more about their property then renters. Most renters don't do renovations.
When a person works in a industry (or has a career) that requires him to move around often from city to city then he would spend a lot of money selling his house every time he had to move. Allowing this person to rent his home rather then own it would save him a lot of money in both the short run and the long run.
The same is true when someone wishes to move because of lack of job opportunities in the location that he lives in presently. If a person can move, say 500 miles away because there are job opportunities that do not exist where he lives then he would benefit if he did not have to bear the expense of selling his house.
Real estate agents here typically charge 7% of the sale. I don't see the percentage changing. But I do see real estate agents slowly being phased out with the development of websites that let you house hunt over the internet. You can do virtual tours now.
Most people I know sell their house and buy a new one when they take a job in a new city (or end up commuting). I don't see too many people just buying a place every time they work in a different city. So nothing would change. In the rare case that someone would take say a three month temp job and didn't want to sell and buy they would have to rent. There would still be some homes for rent.
You can use the blockchain to keep a public ledger of who owns which property. This would eliminate notary fees making the buying and selling of deeds to a place a lot easier and cheaper.
Bring back property rights. Pass a law limiting the amount of homes you can own down to one house per person.
This is the antithesis of property rights.
Property rights would be the protection of property that is owned, and limiting the number of houses that one can own would restrict what people can use their money (property) to purchase.
First off most property owners have created their fortune from Capitalism. We lost capitalism. Now we deal with so many hoops and red tape that it becomes extremely difficult to start anything up. Government got too big and there are too many bureaucrats trying to justify their jobs that all they do all day is pass more laws. There are zero legit reasons for someone needing to own more then one house. If you buy your friends and family houses then you don't own more than one house. If you pass this law all families will be able to afford one house because owning will be cheaper then renting now. Your rent pays that landlords mortgage. If prices come down then the mortgage payment goes down.
You aren't getting it... It's nobodies business how many houses I or anyone else owns... If I own too many houses that I can't keep up with them then they will likely be lost under adverse possession by squatters...
Why must a person establish a "need" to buy something? Who holds that power over the head of a citizen in our Constitutional Republic? There are massive problems, but your proposed solution would make things much worse.
Here is what I get. Allowing someone to own more the one house is slowly bringing us to Feudalism. Landlords with multiple homes hire property management companies to do the work for them, so that they don't have to take care of them.
The reason why people "need" to buy a house is so that everyone has the opportunity to buy shelter. This makes things better not worse. People that own homes care a lot more about their property then renters. Most renters don't do renovations.
When a person works in a industry (or has a career) that requires him to move around often from city to city then he would spend a lot of money selling his house every time he had to move. Allowing this person to rent his home rather then own it would save him a lot of money in both the short run and the long run.
The same is true when someone wishes to move because of lack of job opportunities in the location that he lives in presently. If a person can move, say 500 miles away because there are job opportunities that do not exist where he lives then he would benefit if he did not have to bear the expense of selling his house.
Gold rehypothecation is allowing extra capital to buy up our property. Also driving up our prices.
http://www.jpost.com/Business/Business-Features/Global-agenda-Rehypothecation-360757
And they are buying property world wide with it.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2014/07/10/these-are-the-foreigners-buying-up-american-real-estate/
http://www.jpost.com/Business/Business-Features/Global-agenda-Rehypothecation-360757
And they are buying property world wide with it.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2014/07/10/these-are-the-foreigners-buying-up-american-real-estate/
freedom and liberty is what brings prosperity. not limp wristed do gooders who are paving the road to hell with their good intentions
Freedom, liberty and cheap energy brought us prosperity. We hit cheap peak oil in 01. Explain to me again why every man, woman and child having shelter over their head is the road to hell. Money is not the root of all evil. It is the greed for money that is. So explain to me again why the greed of making money on renters is the path to heaven and why any person needs more then one house?
man you got some serious problems. everyone having a home is not evil, stealing other peoples stuff and giving it to someone else is evil. get a grip on reality
I don't have any serious problems but thanks for your concern. Its not stealing. You get to sell it. You get the going rate for it. And as I said before, your just renting that land from our country, you can't steal something from someone when they don't own it. I have a very good grip on reality. I live on a finite planet with finite resources with a growing population of over 7 billion people.
There were a lot of angry people when humans got the right to vote. Rich people thought they deserved more than one vote. They thought other people were subhuman and didn't deserve those rights back then just like there will be naysayers saying not everyone deserves one home today.
Study the effects of your plan where it is currently tested, in Venezuela. They just enacted a law that renters (having rented more than three years) were entitled to buy their apartments. Violence applied to those who resisted. Other laws, just as stupid, to abridge the market anywhere. Man, they lack tvs, medicine, food, water, electricity, toilet paper and coffins.
Economic law and consequence will eventually repel the stupid law.
https://news.vice.com/article/will-venezuela-become-a-no-fly-country-if-it-defaults-on-its-airline-debt
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/as-venezuelas-maduro-confronts-economic-crisis-pragmatism-is-a-risky-path/2014/07/05/2a654f10-c326-4201-a892-3538f85cf65d_story.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2014/02/20/cheap-gasoline-why-venezuela-is-doomed-to-collapse/3/
From what I can find and from what I have read in the past, a one house policy has nothing to do with Venezuela defaulting. It was bad economic policies, corruption and entitlement to so many government subsidies that led to it. Socialism only works until you run out of other peoples money.
Good (classical liberal) source on Venezuela:
http://panampost.com/
freedom and liberty is what brings prosperity. not limp wristed do gooders who are paving the road to hell with their good intentions
Freedom, liberty and cheap energy brought us prosperity. We hit cheap peak oil in 01. Explain to me again why every man, woman and child having shelter over their head is the road to hell. Money is not the root of all evil. It is the greed for money that is. So explain to me again why the greed of making money on renters is the path to heaven and why any person needs more then one house?
man you got some serious problems. everyone having a home is not evil, stealing other peoples stuff and giving it to someone else is evil. get a grip on reality
I don't have any serious problems but thanks for your concern. Its not stealing. You get to sell it. You get the going rate for it. And as I said before, your just renting that land from our country, you can't steal something from someone when they don't own it. I have a very good grip on reality. I live on a finite planet with finite resources with a growing population of over 7 billion people.
There were a lot of angry people when humans got the right to vote. Rich people thought they deserved more than one vote. They thought other people were subhuman and didn't deserve those rights back then just like there will be naysayers saying not everyone deserves one home today.
Study the effects of your plan where it is currently tested, in Venezuela. They just enacted a law that renters (having rented more than three years) were entitled to buy their apartments. Violence applied to those who resisted. Other laws, just as stupid, to abridge the market anywhere. Man, they lack tvs, medicine, food, water, electricity, toilet paper and coffins.
Economic law and consequence will eventually repel the stupid law.
https://news.vice.com/article/will-venezuela-become-a-no-fly-country-if-it-defaults-on-its-airline-debt
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/as-venezuelas-maduro-confronts-economic-crisis-pragmatism-is-a-risky-path/2014/07/05/2a654f10-c326-4201-a892-3538f85cf65d_story.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2014/02/20/cheap-gasoline-why-venezuela-is-doomed-to-collapse/3/
From what I can find and from what I have read in the past, a one house policy has nothing to do with Venezuela defaulting. It was bad economic policies, corruption and entitlement to so many government subsidies that led to it. Socialism only works until you run out of other peoples money.
my tank is going to be the most peaceful place on the block gotta luv NV/UT. TANKS FOR SALE This T-54 Runs great, has fresh paint inside & out , nice condition & comes with several simulated projectiles. It is currently painted dessert Tan from the Gulf War period.BTC180.5 delivered lower 48.runs working fire mech great tubes shells avail.
freedom and liberty is what brings prosperity. not limp wristed do gooders who are paving the road to hell with their good intentions
Freedom, liberty and cheap energy brought us prosperity. We hit cheap peak oil in 01. Explain to me again why every man, woman and child having shelter over their head is the road to hell. Money is not the root of all evil. It is the greed for money that is. So explain to me again why the greed of making money on renters is the path to heaven and why any person needs more then one house?
man you got some serious problems. everyone having a home is not evil, stealing other peoples stuff and giving it to someone else is evil. get a grip on reality
I don't have any serious problems but thanks for your concern. Its not stealing. You get to sell it. You get the going rate for it. And as I said before, your just renting that land from our country, you can't steal something from someone when they don't own. I have a very good grip on reality. I live on a finite planet with finite resources with a growing population of over 7 billion people.
There were a lot of angry people when humans got the right to vote. Rich people thought they deserved more than one vote. They thought other people were subhuman and didn't deserve those rights back then just like there will be naysayers saying not everyone deserves one home today.
stealing is wrong mmmkay, forcing people to do things they don't want to do is wrong. get it?
you shouldn't have more than one computer. you should give the rest to all the little kiddies in Africa who have no computers
. why would you need more than one? Yeah stealing is wrong. I don't like having 50% of my pay check stolen from me. get it? What we should do though is invade more countries. Thats not forcing anyone to do what we want. get it?
As for your one computer idea. Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, he eats for a lifetime.
so your solution to tyrannical government, is more tyrannical government. interesting idea.
maybe you should work towards liberty, if people didn't have to pay more taxes and figure out all these regulations. there would be so much wealth around, no one would be worrying about not having a house
Its order out of chaos. Its one law. Drop most the others. People will need somewhere to grow food. A mans home is his castle. A place of his own to defend. Yes I do work towards liberty. And yes I agree, if there were less regulations there would be so much more wealth around, no one would be worrying about not having a house. The problem is, if we go back to liberty and capitalism everyone will start having a lot of kids again. They will be able to afford them. Then our grandchildren and great grandchildren will run into the same problems. Because the cycle is approximately every 80 years.
Why not try to break that cycle? To envision it is the start. Maybe it is possible, maybe not.
freedom and liberty is what brings prosperity. not limp wristed do gooders who are paving the road to hell with their good intentions
Freedom, liberty and cheap energy brought us prosperity. We hit cheap peak oil in 01. Explain to me again why every man, woman and child having shelter over their head is the road to hell. Money is not the root of all evil. It is the greed for money that is. So explain to me again why the greed of making money on renters is the path to heaven and why any person needs more then one house?
man you got some serious problems. everyone having a home is not evil, stealing other peoples stuff and giving it to someone else is evil. get a grip on reality
I don't have any serious problems but thanks for your concern. Its not stealing. You get to sell it. You get the going rate for it. And as I said before, your just renting that land from our country, you can't steal something from someone when they don't own. I have a very good grip on reality. I live on a finite planet with finite resources with a growing population of over 7 billion people.
There were a lot of angry people when humans got the right to vote. Rich people thought they deserved more than one vote. They thought other people were subhuman and didn't deserve those rights back then just like there will be naysayers saying not everyone deserves one home today.
stealing is wrong mmmkay, forcing people to do things they don't want to do is wrong. get it?
you shouldn't have more than one computer. you should give the rest to all the little kiddies in Africa who have no computers
. why would you need more than one? Yeah stealing is wrong. I don't like having 50% of my pay check stolen from me. get it? What we should do though is invade more countries. Thats not forcing anyone to do what we want. get it?
As for your one computer idea. Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, he eats for a lifetime.
so your solution to tyrannical government, is more tyrannical government. interesting idea.
maybe you should work towards liberty, if people didn't have to pay more taxes and figure out all these regulations. there would be so much wealth around, no one would be worrying about not having a house
Its order out of chaos. Its one law. Drop most the others. People will need somewhere to grow food. A mans home is his castle. A place of his own to defend. Yes I do work towards liberty. And yes I agree, if there were less regulations there would be so much more wealth around, no one would be worrying about not having a house. The problem is, if we go back to liberty and capitalism everyone will start having a lot of kids again. They will be able to afford them. Then our grandchildren and great grandchildren will run into the same problems. Because the cycle is approximately every 80 years.
freedom and liberty is what brings prosperity. not limp wristed do gooders who are paving the road to hell with their good intentions
Freedom, liberty and cheap energy brought us prosperity. We hit cheap peak oil in 01. Explain to me again why every man, woman and child having shelter over their head is the road to hell. Money is not the root of all evil. It is the greed for money that is. So explain to me again why the greed of making money on renters is the path to heaven and why any person needs more then one house?
man you got some serious problems. everyone having a home is not evil, stealing other peoples stuff and giving it to someone else is evil. get a grip on reality
I don't have any serious problems but thanks for your concern. Its not stealing. You get to sell it. You get the going rate for it. And as I said before, your just renting that land from our country, you can't steal something from someone when they don't own it. I have a very good grip on reality. I live on a finite planet with finite resources with a growing population of over 7 billion people.
There were a lot of angry people when humans got the right to vote. Rich people thought they deserved more than one vote. They thought other people were subhuman and didn't deserve those rights back then just like there will be naysayers saying not everyone deserves one home today.
Study the effects of your plan where it is currently tested, in Venezuela. They just enacted a law that renters (having rented more than three years) were entitled to buy their apartments. Violence applied to those who resisted. Other laws, just as stupid, to abridge the market anywhere. Man, they lack tvs, medicine, food, water, electricity, toilet paper and coffins.
Economic law and consequence will eventually repel the stupid law.
freedom and liberty is what brings prosperity. not limp wristed do gooders who are paving the road to hell with their good intentions
Freedom, liberty and cheap energy brought us prosperity. We hit cheap peak oil in 01. Explain to me again why every man, woman and child having shelter over their head is the road to hell. Money is not the root of all evil. It is the greed for money that is. So explain to me again why the greed of making money on renters is the path to heaven and why any person needs more then one house?
man you got some serious problems. everyone having a home is not evil, stealing other peoples stuff and giving it to someone else is evil. get a grip on reality
I don't have any serious problems but thanks for your concern. Its not stealing. You get to sell it. You get the going rate for it. And as I said before, your just renting that land from our country, you can't steal something from someone when they don't own it. I have a very good grip on reality. I live on a finite planet with finite resources with a growing population of over 7 billion people.
There were a lot of angry people when humans got the right to vote. Rich people thought they deserved more than one vote. They thought other people were subhuman and didn't deserve those rights back then just like there will be naysayers saying not everyone deserves one home today.
Study the effects of your plan where it is currently tested, in Venezuela. They just enacted a law that renters (having rented more than three years) were entitled to buy their apartments. Violence applied to those who resisted. Other laws, just as stupid, to abridge the market anywhere. Man, they lack tvs, medicine, food, water, electricity, toilet paper and coffins.
freedom and liberty is what brings prosperity. not limp wristed do gooders who are paving the road to hell with their good intentions
Freedom, liberty and cheap energy brought us prosperity. We hit cheap peak oil in 01. Explain to me again why every man, woman and child having shelter over their head is the road to hell. Money is not the root of all evil. It is the greed for money that is. So explain to me again why the greed of making money on renters is the path to heaven and why any person needs more then one house?
It is not the road to hell (to have shelter), but making it an entitlement is the same as taking from some by force to give to some others, and that is the road to hell. It is also a guarantee that the goal is not reached.
Think about shoes - everyone should be entitled to have a pair. But wait - they have. The entrepreneurs of the free market, the workers in the free market, and the capitalists in the free market have voluntarily cooperated to give everybody just as many shoes as they want and are willing to pay for.
It works also in housing. Why should it not?
we all know why housing is so expensive, it is regulated to the extreme. and taxed to the extreme. the government wants poor people, because poor people depend on it, they need it, and they vote for it
freedom and liberty is what brings prosperity. not limp wristed do gooders who are paving the road to hell with their good intentions
Freedom, liberty and cheap energy brought us prosperity. We hit cheap peak oil in 01. Explain to me again why every man, woman and child having shelter over their head is the road to hell. Money is not the root of all evil. It is the greed for money that is. So explain to me again why the greed of making money on renters is the path to heaven and why any person needs more then one house?
man you got some serious problems. everyone having a home is not evil, stealing other peoples stuff and giving it to someone else is evil. get a grip on reality
I don't have any serious problems but thanks for your concern. Its not stealing. You get to sell it. You get the going rate for it. And as I said before, your just renting that land from our country, you can't steal something from someone when they don't own. I have a very good grip on reality. I live on a finite planet with finite resources with a growing population of over 7 billion people.
There were a lot of angry people when humans got the right to vote. Rich people thought they deserved more than one vote. They thought other people were subhuman and didn't deserve those rights back then just like there will be naysayers saying not everyone deserves one home today.
stealing is wrong mmmkay, forcing people to do things they don't want to do is wrong. get it?
you shouldn't have more than one computer. you should give the rest to all the little kiddies in Africa who have no computers
. why would you need more than one? Yeah stealing is wrong. I don't like having 50% of my pay check stolen from me. get it? What we should do though is invade more countries. Thats not forcing anyone to do what we want. get it?
As for your one computer idea. Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, he eats for a lifetime.
so your solution to tyrannical government, is more tyrannical government. interesting idea.
maybe you should work towards liberty, if people didn't have to pay more taxes and figure out all these regulations. there would be so much wealth around, no one would be worrying about not having a house
freedom and liberty is what brings prosperity. not limp wristed do gooders who are paving the road to hell with their good intentions
Freedom, liberty and cheap energy brought us prosperity. We hit cheap peak oil in 01. Explain to me again why every man, woman and child having shelter over their head is the road to hell. Money is not the root of all evil. It is the greed for money that is. So explain to me again why the greed of making money on renters is the path to heaven and why any person needs more then one house?
It is not the road to hell (to have shelter), but making it an entitlement is the same as taking from some by force to give to some others, and that is the road to hell. It is also a guarantee that the goal is not reached.
Think about shoes - everyone should be entitled to have a pair. But wait - they have. The entrepreneurs of the free market, the workers in the free market, and the capitalists in the free market have voluntarily cooperated to give everybody just as many shoes as they want and are willing to pay for.
It works also in housing. Why should it not?
freedom and liberty is what brings prosperity. not limp wristed do gooders who are paving the road to hell with their good intentions
Freedom, liberty and cheap energy brought us prosperity. We hit cheap peak oil in 01. Explain to me again why every man, woman and child having shelter over their head is the road to hell. Money is not the root of all evil. It is the greed for money that is. So explain to me again why the greed of making money on renters is the path to heaven and why any person needs more then one house?
man you got some serious problems. everyone having a home is not evil, stealing other peoples stuff and giving it to someone else is evil. get a grip on reality
I don't have any serious problems but thanks for your concern. Its not stealing. You get to sell it. You get the going rate for it. And as I said before, your just renting that land from our country, you can't steal something from someone when they don't own. I have a very good grip on reality. I live on a finite planet with finite resources with a growing population of over 7 billion people.
There were a lot of angry people when humans got the right to vote. Rich people thought they deserved more than one vote. They thought other people were subhuman and didn't deserve those rights back then just like there will be naysayers saying not everyone deserves one home today.
stealing is wrong mmmkay, forcing people to do things they don't want to do is wrong. get it?
you shouldn't have more than one computer. you should give the rest to all the little kiddies in Africa who have no computers
. why would you need more than one? Yeah stealing is wrong. I don't like having 50% of my pay check stolen from me. get it? What we should do though is invade more countries. Thats not forcing anyone to do what we want. get it?
As for your one computer idea. Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, he eats for a lifetime.
I don't know why everyone says renting is cheaper. Then what? Renting a hotel? Renting a campsite? The reason why you pay more when you own....is because you get to keep it.
If there is an economic collapse the housing bubble will pop, and values will plummet making it affordable for renters to buy.
What happens to bitcoiners if the gov bans it? We loose. We made a bad investment. What happens to speculators betting on a housing bubble? They loose. Hedge accordingly.
If a landlord had to sell or give his friends or family his extra houses then I think he has bigger problems on the horizon.
You should listen "to this crap." I'm trying to stop the pitchforks from coming. http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/the-pitchforks-are-coming-for-us-plutocrats-108014.html#.U78jmhYZgcg
Tell me again why YOU need more then one house?
If there is an economic collapse the housing bubble will pop, and values will plummet making it affordable for renters to buy.
What happens to bitcoiners if the gov bans it? We loose. We made a bad investment. What happens to speculators betting on a housing bubble? They loose. Hedge accordingly.
If a landlord had to sell or give his friends or family his extra houses then I think he has bigger problems on the horizon.
You should listen "to this crap." I'm trying to stop the pitchforks from coming. http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/the-pitchforks-are-coming-for-us-plutocrats-108014.html#.U78jmhYZgcg
Tell me again why YOU need more then one house?
The point is that noone have to anwer to you for their choices.
freedom and liberty is what brings prosperity. not limp wristed do gooders who are paving the road to hell with their good intentions
Freedom, liberty and cheap energy brought us prosperity. We hit cheap peak oil in 01. Explain to me again why every man, woman and child having shelter over their head is the road to hell. Money is not the root of all evil. It is the greed for money that is. So explain to me again why the greed of making money on renters is the path to heaven and why any person needs more then one house?
man you got some serious problems. everyone having a home is not evil, stealing other peoples stuff and giving it to someone else is evil. get a grip on reality
I don't have any serious problems but thanks for your concern. Its not stealing. You get to sell it. You get the going rate for it. And as I said before, your just renting that land from our country, you can't steal something from someone when they don't own. I have a very good grip on reality. I live on a finite planet with finite resources with a growing population of over 7 billion people.
There were a lot of angry people when humans got the right to vote. Rich people thought they deserved more than one vote. They thought other people were subhuman and didn't deserve those rights back then just like there will be naysayers saying not everyone deserves one home today.
stealing is wrong mmmkay, forcing people to do things they don't want to do is wrong. get it?
you shouldn't have more than one computer. you should give the rest to all the little kiddies in Africa who have no computers
. why would you need more than one? Jump to: