I think Biden will get back in. That will be far better than hearing from Trump anymore…

This election couldn’t come sooner.

The fact you can not answer that speaks volumes. Really it does.

And this would somehow cause a significant number of houses to be built? And if people have more money thru distribution of some sort, would they work harder to build more houses? If they don’t, how does this help?

You could tax them at 100% but it wouldn’t fix the problem. There are simply just not enough of them. While wealth inequality is a problem, this alone don’t fix it. It is just a crutch.

Well pay taxes if you sell at a profit. Hard to say if the value of his assets increased.

The don’t thing is that the term RINO was initially coined for people exactly like Trump.

They generally do not lie. They simply do not report certain things and over report other things. I have no solution for this or think of a law that could fix it.

Well he could fly over here and deliver it on person. Hopefully that route passes over Ukraine.

I don’t think it should negate you from running for high office but it should make people consider who they vote for.

Mostly due to internet and pretty much every violent crime is publicized. No matter if it is across the country.

What is more funny, or sad maybe, this generation is helicoptering their children far more than past generations even though crime is far lower. I walked alone to and from kindergarten 6 blocks. Now someone would report you.

A better question is, would more houses get built and if so, who would build those houses? If not, and there are more people needing houses than houses available, do you not think that the extra money would mean people would be willing to pay more?

Talk about inflation spiral. lol

Who opens them up exactly? And that person who invests in a restaurant will leave some other job resulting in that much less product being built this something rises in price somewhere.

Rent caps just result in less people or corporations investing in rental properties. If you are alread have 90 houses and 100 people want to rent, how does caps encourage more houses?

At the end of the day the only thing that matters is how productive we are in total. Anything that is scarce will be high in price and if you mandate a lower price, then some people will simply not have shelter if you want to use that example.

Some will without question. Few people, be it Democrat or Republican, will vote outside of their party leaning but many people will simply not vote or throw their vote towards some obscure candidate.

I installed internet into people houses for fifteen years. My sample is pretty broad. It is far nastier than most people realize. There majority is decent but it would be close to one in ten is very nasty then another one in ten that will have nice common 'public guest ’ areas but when their basement and different story. It is really hard to tell from the outside and often the people seem normal. Hording is really common but then you get hording wet garbage as well.

AWACS had parachute and some chut you could slide out at one time. Don’t quote me on that entirely. They simply were not worth it. First most accidents happen and have happened on takeoff and landing. No good in that situation. In a war environment, getting hit by a missile, pretty much the only weapon that will take down an AWAC or similar. Missiles likely won’t give crew time to escape. Plane will be doing some kind of tumble. Then you got training. It not simply train once and all good but every year. Sometimes it is better to use that money and time to provide better alternate training that will be more effective. Say for more escort aircraft or better alternate safety systems within the aircraft. You also have the space it takes up resulting in less functionality of your aircraft.

In a large scale world war III scenario, AWACs and similar would be a dangerous plane to crew. Shot down rapidly. In our current warfare situation, they are one of the safer planes to be in. Unless you are Russian and incompetent.

Are you suggesting that they do not pay some monthly fees for said house? Or more important, are you suggesting they won’t have to pay one hundred percent of any damages done to said house? The government or bank will cover that?

It won’t. Will simply result in more damages this increase in overall rent and less people willing to invest in rental properties this fewer homes to rent. Thus a double hit on increased rental rates.

You can not force people to become landlords. Pass all the laws you want but that just means fewer and fewer places to rent. Is that hard to understand? What do you think happens when there are 100 houses to rent and 200 families needing shelter? Prices keep rising until it becomes profitable for people to invest money into rental.

What the protection measures result in is pretty much only large commercial operations can be landlords due to the need of someone trained to get the maximum out of renters and have the ability to navigate the courts if they do any damages. We see that already as rental costs rise and low inventory is common in most markets.