Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 05/03/2008 2:00:23 AM PDT by antonia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: antonia

You may be a “good renter”. But all renters are not that way. In addition to immediately harming the property they rent, they can also sub-let by bringing other renters into their space to share rent, over-tax limited parking, make noise until late hours, fail to repair small things in the rental unit. Off-premises rental owners also have a different attitude from the owners who live there - they vote against needed improvements and assessments.

All in all renters are not a good thing in a community although individually they may be nice people.

Based on actual experience I favor a by-law rule that says if your own it (condo unit or town-house) you must live in it. If you want to live “off-premises”, sell it. Good rule!


2 posted on 05/03/2008 2:20:22 AM PDT by Rapscallion (Our tolerance will be our undoing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: antonia

F#@$%^g Socialism is a wonderful thing isn’t it

I’ve grown to hate people and their whining for handouts if you don’t want to be a renter then buy a house if you do then stop whining about the papers you sign to own nothing

Damn crybabies !!


3 posted on 05/03/2008 2:22:35 AM PDT by ATOMIC_PUNK (http://eaglecooler.wordpress.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: antonia

The idea that the federal government shouldn’t be bailing out banks or lenders who make bad deals and got themselves into trouble certainly has a lot of merit.

But the tone of the petition, posing the idea that renters are somehow victims because they chose not to undergo the burdens of home ownership and its benefits is divisive and silly.


4 posted on 05/03/2008 2:42:42 AM PDT by I_Like_Spam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: antonia

Ya might wanna duck!


5 posted on 05/03/2008 3:06:17 AM PDT by VA40
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: VA40; I_Like_Spam

Renters are about 30% of the market, the defaulters about 2%. Many renters chose not to buy in to an obviously overpriced market that was bound to fall. And they were right, except for the government, by propping up the mortgage holders are not allowing the market to come down as it needs to.

Many home owners have made adjustments to make sure that they keep their budgets balanced in the black. Why should any tax payer have to pay for a rip off scheme like this? For example: My friends and I have been trading a toy amongst ourselves for the past several years (strictly on credit of course) The toy is rumored to be from a famous celebrity. It was first sold for $1. After 3 years of being traded back and forth between our group of friends, the value has rocketed to $2,000,000.00. I am the current holder of this valuable security. I wonder if the Fed will let me use it to secure a $2,000,000 loan for a new house in Hollywood?

If the Feds insist on interjecting themselves perhaps they should re-distribute (confiscate) the earnings of the builders, lenders, and homeowners who benefited from the inflated property values. It will be called the American Real Estate Mulligan Act of 2008. All realized property gains in excess of 3.5% per year would be sent to the Mulligan Czar and redistributed (less 30% to fund the American Bloated Bureaucracy and Lobbyist Full Employment Act) to those left standing when the music stopped.


7 posted on 05/03/2008 4:35:31 AM PDT by antonia ("Information is terrain and someone will occupy it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: antonia
***"Angry renters"***

Angry? I'll show you angry.... I just got my Real Estate Tax Bill. Trust me - I'm "Angry".

So how about a petition like this...

Angry property owners who have their taxes raised by 32% of the friken deadbeat parasites who rent

And I don't want to hear any bullsh__ that Renters 'pay' property taxes. If you live in a 12 unit building you pay 1/12, if its a 32 unit building you pay 1/32, as the building owner divides his bill proportionally. (That may not be exact but that's how it works.)

I'm sick and tired my MY BILL going up 12% each year because of some parasites with six brats voting that 'we' need a new school and such. So I'd be more than happy to go back to how it was in the 1800's - Only Property Owners Can Vote!

What? Too draconian, okay -- then ...

Only Property Owners Can Vote On A Property Tax Increase.
. And THAT is feasible. We already have separate ballots for things like Fire Protection Districts. So renters just get a shorter ballot with those running for office. Property Owners bring their Bill in to prove they're owners and get the longer ballot - with the Real Estate Tax issues.

No one is (cough) disenfranchised. And I ain't paying for that 32 percent's spawn to go to a new school. Or some yuppie scum DINK who want new Handball Courts, a Rock Climbing Wall, a Building to house them and a parking lot for their Volvo -- that I'll Be Paying For!

Angry renters, harrumph!

I'm now off to rob a Gas Station so I can pay for the %@$*%ing deadbeat renters!
(That's SARCASM for you renters in Rio Linda)

9 posted on 05/03/2008 7:22:00 AM PDT by Condor51 (I have guns in my nightstand because a Cop won't fit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson