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.

My hospital didn’t sign my medical power of attorney. Yours did?

Now you lost me. Are you saying the current system of marriage works and at the same time insisting I’m the one against same sex marriage?

!That’s not how contracts work!<

Which part? The entities entering into a contract or the judicial branch honoring contracts?

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.

Please explain to me how exactly could I “do paperwork”

You enter into a contractual union that is recognized by the federal government.

If there “unions” and not “marriages” it wouldn’t have been issue.

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 made my point better than me.

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.

This is all so stupid. It’s the religious term “marriage” that they all fight for. Give it to them.

Instead government issues and recognizes contractual unions between two consenting adults.

Problem solved.

I’m tired of going high do nothing DINOs. Here’s an idea give them to a couple of our allies. Let them release.

But the defendant can’t issue a counter suit. How is that possible. I hate this timeline. He will get away with it too watch…

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.

If anything it is refreshing to see people be critical of promise and true outcome.

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.

I never understood this sentiment. For single family homes the market sets the price. It’s not like when you buy a house and use it for a rental all of sudden it’s cheaper or more expensive in some way. You could make a price/demand argument but then again the underlying demand is housing not money hungry landlords. If there was not an underlying housing demand, no one would rent and it would fail as an investment.

How does the community serve those who want to rent? Apartments? Now that is where we can agree. Apartment valuation is calculated on operations not on the market. The only way to raise value of an apartment is to raise rent (or reduce expenses in some way but at some point you can only do so much). At least with SFH you have appreciation that landlords can factor in for return.

Lastly, 2 of my rentals were foreclosures. If anything I’m performing the city a service by buying these properties and adding value. If you had to choose, would you rather live next to a vacant house or a rental?

To answer your question, it’s fair for a renter to not build equity because they don’t pay for upkeep or have the risk associated with the loan. You have to put skin in the game at some point.

Edit: there are some good points for the other side of the argument if you keep reading. I don’t know what the answer is but I’m not convinced that restrictions or to disincentivize rental operations is the answer.