|Re: Rental policies?||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: R Philip Dowds (rpdowdscomcast.net)|
|Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 02:13:35 -0800 (PST)|
There are big problems with this, because such a policy would empower the unilateral actions of the first-comers-first-served to deprive other members of equivalent property rights. It's roughly comparable to placing an upper limit of X children in the community as whole — which, if enforced, could compel some members to move out, place a baby for adoption, or get an abortion. Your proposal may not, in fact, be legal in your state. But never mind what the attorneys think. You need to take into consideration the ethics and consequences of such mandates. For every ailment under the sun, There is a remedy, or there is none. If there be one, try to find it; If there be none, never mind it. -- Mother Goose RPD On Nov 8, 2011, at 8:40 PM, Marty Roberts wrote: > We are looking at a proposal that no more than 3 of our 14 houses can > be rented out at any one time. We have heard that with 50% rentals, > homes would have a very hard time selling or getting financing.
- Re: Rental policies?, (continued)
- Re: Rental policies? R Philip Dowds, November 9 2011
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.