That’s not what squatting means. I just told you that. Don’t you read the thread? Go google your own shit for yourself. Fuck off.
ahahahahahaha wait I thought playing nitty semantics over a word was Actually Bad. You’re a joke.
1 Like
It’s so easy to answer this and to distinguish between properties that have been abandoned by some reasonable definition that I think your post is bad faith trolling. I’m positive you could come up with a reasonable answer to it, that a reasonable answer has already occurred to you and that you know I already have a reasonable answer.
Or maybe you consider the obvious answer unreasonable? Then that’s where an honest response starts.
Is trolling.
Right, squatting on actually abandoned properties and enshrining that in law in some way is totally fine. But that has nothing to do with not having evictions! I don’t see why it’s bad faith to assume that Sabo thinks that people who stop paying rent and then can’t be evicted in his world shouldn’t have a path to ownership. They already de facto own it since they can’t be evicted and don’t pay any rent. (property taxes are actually a good point too, is the landlord supposed to keep paying property taxes on the unit when the tenants live there rent free for years?).
Sabo just suggested something that actually has happened and had legal precedent; adverse possession. For you to pretend that’s an unworkable fantasy is ridiculous.
Loosen rules for adverse possession. Duh. Arguing against allowing all squatting under any circumstances is just bad faith strawmanning.
IT ISN’T A STRAWMAN! Sabo said people should stop paying their rent and eviction shouldn’t be allowed.
Nothing Sabo had posted in this thread implies anything like you can just squat in a house because the occupants were out taking the dog for a walk.
Well shit man, I didn’t suggest that either. Does that mean you’re TROLLING AND STRAWMANNING or are you engaging in a little bit of hyperbole to make your point?
What the actual fuck? I quoted you on that.
You quoted me on what?
“What happens if you’re renovating a rental property you own and squatters move in one night? Hey it’s unoccupied, shrug”
This is the same thing. It means the same thing. It’s the same point.
A rental property being renovated might be unoccupied for months. Walking the dog takes ten minutes. You obviously exaggerated my post for effect, which is fine. After all I did the same thing to Sabo’s position – slightly exaggerated what he likely meant for effect, with the rental property renovation hypothetical. Obviously the renter stopping paying of rent, permanantly occupying the home and doing maintenance and paying taxes then owning it eventually isn’t exaggerated at all; it seems to be what Sabo actually is advocating for.
And anyway if the latter is allowed then why not just allow the former. It will happen anyway eventually. Who would pay rent when they don’t have to?
You do realize that @microbet & me aren’t members of the CA assemblies, correct? And you do realize that back in the bad old days, it was legislators in those assemblies who made up our laws. Now there’re all going to be long dead by now… so nobody alive is going to to be able to give first-hand As to your Qs.
However, history is a thing. This is so long ago, it might not have made it’s way to the interwebs yet. But libraries and inter-library loans are a thing too. And there my friend… there is where you’ll find the As you seek to the Qs you so lol-tastically have.
I’m asking what YOU think. I mean, not really because obviously you’ll never actually write clearly what you’re advocating. So I guess I’m asking what microbet thinks you think, which is a much more productive conversation to have.
6 Likes
Instead of asking stupid rhetorical Qs… how about this…
IYO is the landlord system nonviable?
Is that what you are getting at when you say “why pay rent?”. Or are you just trolling as usual. There’s a place for rhetorical Qs. This is not one of them. So… if you wanna chat about if/or if not/ the landlord system is nonviable… an interesting chat could be had.
OTOH if you want to just JAQ off, Semantikes, and troll… well I guess you will.
You are asking me this: What happens when somebody tries to live at an active construction site.
Have I stated your Q correctly?
That isn’t a rhetorical question
1 Like
So, you are saying you have no other interest or point to be made by asking it, You are only interested in the A to the Q itself, and only that, and nothing more? As in… you are considering actually doing so?
Would you like me to PM you the answer? If you have no other point to make, I think that would be more considerate to the lurkers.
Do you want me to PM you the answer?
I don’t care what you do
If you don’t care what I do, what are you hectoring me to google your shiz for you?