17 Aug 20
@averagejoe1 said$100 room? Right. 😆
Natural Progression is indeed natural. Supply and demand comes to mind. The constitution does not get into the business of government being involved in housing, where people live, etc. A person sets out to establish his or her living conditions, in this land of opportunity. (Residences) are available in many forms and fashions, to pick from. A $100 room to let, or a $2 ...[text shortened]... it, and not having children until he can afford it.
Why is the government in this discussion.
17 Aug 20
@averagejoe1 saidIsn't there something about the "Pursuit of Happiness" or did I dream that?
Natural Progression is indeed natural. Supply and demand comes to mind. The constitution does not get into the business of government being involved in housing, where people live, etc.
17 Aug 20
@athousandyoung saidWell, I am assuming a little creativity, like roommates to share rates, working out arrangements with landlords to reduce the rate, etc etc. True, $100 is not realistic, but you can find a place to rent for not much more than that. 2 guys at $200 each can find a nice $400 property. Just sayin
$100 room? Right. 😆
@wolfgang59 saidDon't get your point. Pursing happiness, though, means you should have a right to try to get happy. It doesn't mean one has a right to have someone else, or government, be sure you are happy. Surely you agree with that?
Isn't there something about the "Pursuit of Happiness" or did I dream that?
17 Aug 20
@AverageJoe1
Substitute Health for Happy, what about that? Do you figure government should not help ANYONE for any reason? If so, why bother to have a national government at all?
17 Aug 20
@averagejoe1 saidya, if your idea of being happy is whacking someone with an icepick, lol, then
Don't get your point. Pursing happiness, though, means you should have a right to try to get happy. It doesn't mean one has a right to have someone else, or government, be sure you are happy. Surely you agree with that?
I guess you don't have that 'right'. 😆
@sonhouse saidLet the turning point, on all seminal issues, be the Constitution. Do you not agree with that? Do you know that health care is not mentioned in the Constitution? Not one word.
@AverageJoe1
Substitute Health for Happy, what about that? Do you figure government should not help ANYONE for any reason? If so, why bother to have a national government at all?
You know, if it DID say 'Life, liberty and the pursuit of Health', it would not change a thikng...it would be saying to pursue (good) health. OK...substitute 'Happy' with 'Health". We all have a right to pursue healthfulness, good health. I go to a gym, pursuing good health. If Mr Smith can't afford a gym, I am thinking that you are suggesting that the government pay for his membership? A simple question.
Why have a government? To have agencies like FDA to confirm healthy drugs and food....the FAA to keep planes safe in the skies. OSHA to keep buildings safe. To have military. The average citizen cannot do what they do, which is for our universal protection. The average citizen DOES have a responsibility for his own health. You don't seriously think the government should guarantee and pay for my private doctor, do you? What about the fire insurance premium on my house? I need a car to get to work. Can't afford one. Should the government give me one? Seriously. You see, the squad and all of your other dear leaders think that indeed, I should have a right to all that. So do you, it appears.
Carry on. We can thresh it all out in November.
18 Aug 20
@averagejoe1 saidOne word: "Life"
Do you know that health care is not mentioned in the Constitution? Not one word.
'Life, liberty and the pursuit
18 Aug 20
@wolfgang59 saidIf we are going to parse that phrase, I would go for liberty over life, so we can just disagree, I guess. If y'all do win, are you really going to take my house? Will someone who hasn't worked as hard as I have actually end up with my house? It is a really valuable house. A fair question.
One word: "Life"
18 Aug 20
@averagejoe1 saidNobody want to take the house you live in.
If we are going to parse that phrase, I would go for liberty over life, so we can just disagree, I guess. If y'all do win, are you really going to take my house? Will someone who hasn't worked as hard as I have actually end up with my house? It is a really valuable house. A fair question.
18 Aug 20
@averagejoe1 saidYour constitution is hundreds of years old.
Let the turning point, on all seminal issues, be the Constitution. Do you not agree with that? Do you know that health care is not mentioned in the Constitution? Not one word.
You know, if it DID say 'Life, liberty and the pursuit of Health', it would not change a thikng...it would be saying to pursue (good) health. OK...substitute 'Happy' with 'Health". We all ...[text shortened]... ve a right to all that. So do you, it appears.
Carry on. We can thresh it all out in November.
It predates trains, cars, antibiotics, most of science, automatic rifles, etc.
It was written in a time so far removed from our own, that it can’t fathom industrialized genocides, pandemics spreading world-wide within days, nuclear weapons, the internet, women voting, etc.
So to let it be the turning point on all seminal issues is ridiculous.
@averagejoe1 saidLarge property portfolios in private hands have nothing to do with supply and demand. You can replace them with large publicly owned portfolios without effecting either.
Natural Progression is indeed natural. Supply and demand comes to mind. The constitution does not get into the business of government being involved in housing, where people live, etc. A person sets out to establish his or her living conditions, in this land of opportunity. (Residences) are available in many forms and fashions, to pick from. A $100 room to let, or a $2 ...[text shortened]... it, and not having children until he can afford it.
Why is the government in this discussion.
You keep intimating that it’s natural to want to own your own home and I agree. But I’d rather live in a well maintained affordable publicly owned property while I save for that house. Regulation of the private rented sector just doesn’t work because it clashes with the obvious profit motive of the landlord.
I think own to rent can be equitable for small portfolios because the smaller landlord has an incentive to maintain his / her two or three properties and encourage long term residency by forming a good relationship with the tenant.
It’s the large faceless venture capital portfolios that are good for the office and mall building sectors but disastrous for the private powerless tenant.
18 Aug 20
@athousandyoung saidEspecially with AverageJoe living in it!
Nobody want to take the house you live in.
18 Aug 20
@kevcvs57 saidHelp! Well, I do give credit to Shav, for confirming his opinion that the Constitution be set aside, to be replaced by government regulations. Ironic, though, because reducing regulations in the last 3 years is what caused our economic explosion. And then, you write "publicly owned,' and 'regulation', and 'profit motive'. Does that not give us all pause? Realize that the money you spent today was derived at some point by profit. But then, why would libs need profit/money if they just take what they want? Is that the plan? I have no idea of the liberal plan. I do know that it is taking hold in Portland, though. Far out, to quote John Denver.
Large property portfolios in private hands have nothing to do with supply and demand. You can replace them with large publicly owned portfolios without effecting either.
You keep intimating that it’s natural to want to own your own home and I agree. But I’d rather live in a well maintained affordable publicly owned property while I save for that house. Regulation of the pri ...[text shortened]... t are good for the office and mall building sectors but disastrous for the private powerless tenant.
Limiting a landlord to 'two or three properties'?? Limit production of Henry Ford and Steve Jobs? All due respects, I think you are not thinking this though. Let Americans run free (liberty, mentioned above). Elon Musk's (Tesla genius) next idea is to send garbage into space. Environmentalists should encourage him. Don't choke Elon. Or, is your authoritarian government going to pick-and-choose which folks can run free. Brrrrr as I used to say.
I'm afraid I don't understand your last sentence. Anyway, I have to be careful because my partner got kicked out for about 3 years for expressing some opinion, I want to be around November 3 so that y'all will have someone to kick around!