Its the same principle. Personally Id make second homes illegal …it destroys communities and takes housing stock from people that actually need it, but hey ho. Thatcher fucked us as well selling off council houses.
The problem is your orginal statement. “Wanting the law to be upheld only in situations you like” would cover your parents. A law system that would not invoke such a desire cannot exist in a society that still has landlords.
Totally agree. But I wouldnt like it if someone misled my parents like this and took the house they actually live in, so I dont like this.
This was a renter taking the house that they, the renter, lived in
Yes, where are you confused.
It was not depriving someone of ownership of the house they lived in but precisely the opposite of that, granting someone that ownership.
Yeah…take the landlord element out of it.
but then that would be a completely different situation. why would you expect people to feel the same way about a completely different situation?
Its the same principle. Personally Id make second homes illegal …it destroys communities and takes housing stock from people that actually need it, but hey ho. Thatcher fucked us as well selling off council houses.
Now if you replace landlord with Jew, then think about it tankies
What if the world was made out of pudding
We could eat it.
He’s a landlord, that wasn’t the house he lived in…
Yes. I read that. Youre not getting my point.
The problem is your orginal statement. “Wanting the law to be upheld only in situations you like” would cover your parents. A law system that would not invoke such a desire cannot exist in a society that still has landlords.
Yeah, we should ban landleeches. Unfortunately that wont happen cause money talks.
If only there was some other place besides money that political power could grow from