191–200 of 290 posts
I couldn't help but imagine an older version of Erlich Bachman from Silicon Valley while reading the name throughout the story. https://i.imgur.com/qXUq2eX.jpg
Did anyone else read this paragraph wonder wtf really happened... "Bachman enrolled at Tulane University in the fall of 1975, but his time there was rocky and brief, ruptured by a horrific incident in January at the Sigma Chi house, just off campus. Although Bachman was not a member of the frat, he told Friedman he’d been hanging around the house with a friend from Elkins Park, a boy a year older named Ken Gutzeit. S…
What a weird story. One strongly suspects that there must be more to it. As reported, to not even be indicted (which usually has a low bar) for stabbing someone to death in full view of numerous witnesses seems like a pretty abnormal outcome.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I lived in mortal fear of the day one of them realised that they could just stop paying me rent, and there's nothing I can do about it whatsoever That is of course false. It may be a hassle, but you can absolutely to something. And giving people housing is important, that's why the laws often favor the person renting, not the owner. The laws is a risk you have to take if you want to rent out your place. Price it in…
Realistically, there's nothing I can do about it because the eviction process is so long and time consuming, that by the time I finally evict the person, my lease would be over and I'd be moving out anyway. After having given my roommate free housing for many months of course. > "Giving people housing is important" I agree! So let's make the government financially liable for any missed rent payments, while the evicti…
The kind of tenancy laws I read in articles like these, sound absolutely idiotic. If you let someone into your home, and they aren't on the lease, you should be able to kick them out anytime they overstay their welcome. If you do sign a lease with someone, and they haven't paid their rent, you should be able to throw their stuff out and change the locks as soon as their security deposit has run itself out. As a forme…
> I lived in mortal fear of the day one of them realised that they could just stop paying me rent, and there's nothing I can do about it whatsoever That is of course false. It may be a hassle, but you can absolutely to something. And giving people housing is important, that's why the laws often favor the person renting, not the owner. The laws is a risk you have to take if you want to rent out your place. Price it in…
I still rent out my old place because I took a bath in the financial crisis and I needed to move. I can't just "price it in" as I can only charge what the market will bear, which just barely covers my mortgage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It depends where. In France you are completely stuck when someone dies not pay. It can take over a year to finally kick someone out. But then how do you kick them out? By doing something ! Which was my point. Saying "nothing whatsoever to do about it" is a lie by the OP. I'm not saying all the rules are sane. But it's better to protect the weak that need roof over their heads, than the persons renting out a house t…
>Having a house to live in should be. I think their is a confusion of rights and duties occurring here. You have a right to own a house. What you are speaking about is others having a duty to provide you with a house. In particular, we need to be clear on exactly what the duty to provide housing is. For example, there is a significant difference between the government offering safe homeless shelters because society h…
There must be a tradeoff there. Everyone requires the legal right to occupy the volume of their own body. It would be completely unethical to make it illegal for a person to exist. Any attempt to do so induces such a person to treat the legal structure as a mortal enemy.
So in exchange for respecting a land property right of another, those land-owners have a duty to provide those who might otherwise develop that owned land for their own purposes with a location on which they may exist. They don't even need to actually build any houses, just to allow for any type of housing to be built without attempting to prevent it. If they fail in this duty, they have abrogated the social contract that allows land property to exist, and those with no place to stand could ethically seize the land property.
The right to own land comes with a duty to supply living space to those whom you would exclude from it. Surface volume is a limited resource, and impossible to defend in large parcels without the cooperation of others.
It would be advantageous for the landowners to form a cartel, such that they could retaliate against renegades that undermine the collective property right by neglecting the duty, because the natural game-theory equilibrium is for everyone to be a NIMBY until the landless people reach a breaking point and murder all the landowners, just to take a reasonable portion for themselves.
If you don't build houses, you need to build strong walls.
Georgists have put a lot of thought into this concept, even if I don't entirely agree with their proposed solutions to the problem.
This is one of those extreme pieces that illustrate a libertarian trope about property rights. "Due to some crazy librul laws about renting apartments this psycho stabbed me and ate my cat..." Landlord laws are there to protect people from property owners that are often unfair and discriminatory. It is the VAST-99.999%-almost-always-few-exceptions-case that landlords are unfair to tenants rather than psycho's like th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe not 'inconsistent' so much as neglected to include the key details necessary to understand why Vidrine was acquitted (or, 'not indicted'). I mean, it's presented as a heinous murder. But yeah, you are right, after a second read there isn't major inconsistencies.
> neglected to include the key details The “key detail” is Bachman was close to a traumatic, seemingly-random violent interaction in his youth. Whether it was cheese snacks or a cheese sandwich, and who attacked whom first, are largely irrelevant to the main story.
2. see my comment below, where i point out that, indeed the players and events that unfolded here are only proximal to not directly in the scope of the story about Jamison.
3. I already admitted there wasnt major inconsistencies, whaddayawant from me. A formal retraction?
Did anyone else read this paragraph wonder wtf really happened... "Bachman enrolled at Tulane University in the fall of 1975, but his time there was rocky and brief, ruptured by a horrific incident in January at the Sigma Chi house, just off campus. Although Bachman was not a member of the frat, he told Friedman he’d been hanging around the house with a friend from Elkins Park, a boy a year older named Ken Gutzeit. S…
Did anyone else read this paragraph wonder wtf really happened... "Bachman enrolled at Tulane University in the fall of 1975, but his time there was rocky and brief, ruptured by a horrific incident in January at the Sigma Chi house, just off campus. Although Bachman was not a member of the frat, he told Friedman he’d been hanging around the house with a friend from Elkins Park, a boy a year older named Ken Gutzeit. S…
