Categories
Communism

Theft

This is another post about the blatant theft of property that has been occurring in this country: the government is forcing property owners to fund their lockdowns by demanding that they provide free housing. The latest in these stories is this one from California.

The homeowner in this case isn’t some “evil” megacorporation. When she moved in with her boyfriend, she decided to rent out her beachfront condo in order to cover the mortgage, tax, and other expenses.

The tenant in this case hasn’t paid rent in over 14 months, and has been subletting the property, and even listing it on AirBNB as a vacation rental, despite the fact that all of that is prohibited by the lease. A new law passed in May says that landlords can only evict tenants if they pose an imminent threat to health or safety, leaving landlords with no recourse or means of collecting any past due rents.

Slate jumps on the bandwagon by claiming “million of tenants will lose ‘their homes'” when the eviction moratorium expires, completely ignoring the fact that the properties aren’t the tenants’ homes in the first place. The Slate article goes on to claim that there is government money available for landlords to be made whole, but many landlords are refusing to accept the money, thereby making the landlords look mean.

The reason why that money is a bad deal for landlords is that, like most government plans, the money comes with strings attached. The deal is that the property owner has to sign a contract accepting the government funds as a complete settlement of ALL monies due. If the tenant moves out and the property has tens of thousands of dollars in damages- too bad. You can’t report the tenant’s history and failure to pay rent to anyone.

I will quote Slate now:

Eviction should not be the solution to every landlord problem, even though that has been an underlying assumption in the United States for a very long time. We are comparing a choice that someone makes to start a business venture with a fundamental right and need for shelter just to exist as a human being—and I think we need to stop equating those two things. (emphasis added)

Do you see what they are claiming? A person has a right to a place to live, even at the expense of someone else. This is communist bullshit. The ultimate goal here is that property owners will be forced to provide free homes to anyone who claims a need.

I simply can’t see how this is NOT a violation of the takings clause. So far, the courts are taking the position that an eviction moratorium doesn’t deprive the property owner of their property because the rent is still due, even though there is no mechanism in place to allow for the collection of rent.

I see no difference between this and requiring a restaurant to feed people on demand. What else do they want for free? This “eliminate rent” movement is the first step towards destroying our economy and replacing it with communism. This is class warfare, pure and simple.

Poor people and minorities are primarily the people who rent homes. Whites and more affluent people own their homes. Race and class are being used to destroy home ownership.

3 replies on “Theft”

This makes me wonder.

There is now a $950, I believe, threshold on shoplifting before it’s a prosecutable crime in California.

I wonder if this would apply to a party of, say, four or five people who go to a nice restaurant, order some nice wine and food, and then just … leave. Restaurants having to feed people on demand? Not quite … but not that different either. (I think this is actually considered defrauding an inkeeper, and can be considered either a misdemeanor or felony … and I wonder how long it will stay on the books that way.)

Those places are getting close to imploding, there is a break over point, none of it is anything less than 110% intentional, must not be far off either from the looks of things. Touch it off middle of the summer maybe. My money is on Matt Bracken’s postulation regarding creating dire circumstances and employing plausible deniability for bringing in some form of foreign “peace keeping” forces or a really nasty federally sanctioned national “police” force. Incremental stages to an eventual police state.
I think it fails. But it won’t be very nice either before things are arighted.

There’s things going on with good people, we can’t see, they are doing good things, but they also seriously, need all us good folks to see how bad this evil incarnate trying to destroy our country is. So things can get better and positive anti-fragile change can take place. Kind of like hard love. They need a particular plurality in solidarity, to see with their own eyes all the truth unvarnished.

Five acres and independence. We need more folks connected to the earth, they become good shepards, more agrarianism is healthy. Balance out the modern world.

Kinda surprised there hasn’t been a plague of Jewish Lightning. If done right, could even point the finger at the swatters (I won’t call them tenants). Arsonist for hire could be an interesting side hustle.

Comments are closed.