No, I'm trying to get your family recognized nationwide by using a different term to remove the barrier to rights and privileges. I'm separating church and state. I'm suggesting the freedom to get "married" by whatever religion accepts people for who they are. I'm saying the government should recognize when two people decide to contribute to society as one.
You can do both is my point. Get a certificate of union from the government (establish rights) and then go get married by whomever you want. Again problem solved.
Close. You’re right there’s no profit without demand. Now, consider what happens when certain entities with way more money than most of us comes along and decides they want to induce artificial scarcity by buying up and leaving empty a ton of houses.
That's a building shortage problem and/or developmental cycle problem. I want to live in New York next to central park. I have a job why can't I?
They both kinda suck. I’d rather live next to someone who is invested in the property.
You didn't answer my question.
I could agree with this if rent was pegged to a percentage of the mortgage value. The issue is that the landlord makes a purchase and now owes, let’s say, 1k/mo for everything. Rent, taxes, fees, etc.
As I stated before, I do exactly this. But landlords have to make a profit. So landlords can only expect appreciation as upside? That's now creating more of a bubble than what's currently going on.
@Noxy. Question. Would you rather be "married", with no rights or privileges, to your spouse or be in a "union" with your spouse with rights and privileges?
I hate to say it but religious people claim the word marriage. You can fight all you want but it won't change the outcome.
Your recognized "union" provides all of those rights and goes to any level of detail you wish. For example, imagine a union, will, POA, all wrapped up into one.
I think you missed the main term in my response. Union. A union is a recognized formation of parts that work together for a common interest or purpose.
A "union" could be designated to have all rights and privileges that you lay out as only reserved for marriage. But a union could also go further. It could go into any level of granularity that the people of the union specify that might be ambiguous with typical "marriage rights". If marriage defines everything then what's the point of a prenup? Also, ALL of your examples can be superseded by other legal agreements, contracts, wills, etc. For example, a signed power of attorney takes priority of hospital decisions.
I'm making quite the opposite point on same-sex marriage.
I charge that same amount for my rental that is two blocks from the beach. 1600sft with a garage. The unit next to me just sold for 1.4 million. I highly doubt I'm contributing to the problem.
I also offer my tenants the option to buy the properties they live in but the property will be owner financed with the condition that it is appraised at time of "sale" and second sale gain is split with equity position. Again I'm only looking to make 7% return on my investment inflation adjusted. If they want out and they bought, I get the upside on market rate (with whatever equity position I hold). But the tenant at least keep whatever equity they grew and they get upside on their equity position.
None of my tenants have taken the deal. I think it's more than fair.
I listened to an interesting take on her on a podcast. Basically they think she is looking beyond Trump and the void if and when he is out of office and she is positioning herself to be the tell it how it is candidate.
Don't get me started. He did not invent the lightbulb. Did he "perfect" it? Maybe? But only after trial and error of 100's of filaments including human hair.
This is all a front so Trump can claim he is hard on China. In reality, China bought a ton of his crypto with an agreement to implement tariffs. Trump only cares about lining his pocket and demonstrating power. This achieves both.
This is what I have learned from all of this. Trump has exposed the one lever where there is no checks or balances. He found a sharp machete when he went looking for pruning shears.
No, I'm trying to get your family recognized nationwide by using a different term to remove the barrier to rights and privileges. I'm separating church and state. I'm suggesting the freedom to get "married" by whatever religion accepts people for who they are. I'm saying the government should recognize when two people decide to contribute to society as one.
You can do both is my point. Get a certificate of union from the government (establish rights) and then go get married by whomever you want. Again problem solved.