Rudy Canoza wrote:
> George Grapman wrote:
>> Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>> jenius wrote:
>>>> On May 10, 9:51 pm, "OneTwoThree" <you...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>> In response to the Supreme Court decision that sup****ted the rights
of
>>>>> government to use the process of eminent domain to seize private
>>>>> property
>>>>> and turn it over to developers, the leftist California legislature
>>>>> refused
>>>>> to do anything to clarify or condemn this decision
>>>>>
>>>>> Fortunately, we in California have the right of initiative, meaning
>>>>> we can
>>>>> do what our legislature is to cowardly or corrupt to do themselves.
>>>>>
>>>>> This upcoming election, we are being presented with two initiatives
>>>>> designed
>>>>> to address this cowardly Supreme Court.and their idiotic eminent
>>>>> domain
>>>>> issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> Both propositions on our ballot limit the ability of government to
>>>>> seize
>>>>> private property in order to turn it over to private developers.
>>>>>
>>>>> One goes a step further, and throws rent control into the mix,
>>>>> making it
>>>>> unconstitutional (in California only) to impose rent control.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll have to admit, I'm ambivalent on this one. As one who rented
>>>>> for many
>>>>> years, I have an innate and inborn resentment towards greedy
>>>>> landlords who
>>>>> fail to maintain their property with any regularity or alacrity yet
>>>>> never
>>>>> fail to raise rents as often as possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> On the other hand, what is rent control but government telling a
>>>>> property
>>>>> owner what he can and cannot do with his property?
>>>>>
>>>>> I truly have an open mind on this topic. I would appreciate cogent
>>>>> arguments
>>>>> in favor of rent control.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, not the usual leftist crap about poor people, but a rationale
>>>>> which
>>>>> convinces me that rent control is justified where eminent domain
>>>>> seizure of
>>>>> property to give to developers is not.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any of you libs and leftists want to give it a shot?
>>>>>
>>>>> .
>>>>
>>>> rent control should be legal in every state, poor people can work up
>>>> to 60 hrs. a week and still not be able to pay rent. in my rural
state
>>>> you also have to have a car to work almost any where. greedy
>>>> landlords are creating homelessness.
>>>
>>> Rent control should be ended, period. You do not have a right to any
>>> particular residence. If you can't afford it, move. High rents have
>>> nothing to do with homelessness.
>>
>> Why stop there? Let's eliminate regulation of interest on credit
>> cards and loans. If you can't pay the interest don't take the loan.
>
> There should be no price controls of any kind.
>
> In fact, it seems to me there isn't much regulation of credit card
> interest rates at all. It used to be the nearly universal maximum rate
> was 18% per year, but I now see rates up in the 22% range. But your
> point is exactly right: don't borrow the money if you can't afford the
> cost of it.
Let's also eliminate FDIC. It is not my fault that you put your
savings in a bank that failed. You should have done more research.
Also, stop licensing lenders. Bring bank the corner loan shark.
|
