Hi All. Here is Phil's argument against the new surtax for those who buy property and keep it less than five years. Just cleaned it up a bit and changed very little content. Enough room at 296 words to list both organizations. Thanks for coming through, Phil. You didn't rant and rave too much! Please review.
Don't hate the
players, hate the game. Real estate is a pawn in the game of global finance.
Easy money here and easy money from abroad work to accelerate the unaffordability of San Francisco. This proposition does nothing to
alleviate the driving force, but it is the blunt tool designed to punish
small players at the end of the chain of money creation. The hated speculator.
There would be no speculators if there was nothing to speculate on. They are
speculating on inflation. The inflation is not their fault. They didn't print
trillions of dollars out of thin air.
What is also
interesting about this proposition, like almost all politics these days, is that
it exempts the big guys. Have more than thirty units, flip away.
also deters another class of speculators: the improvers. The small business that is good at renovating and doing
it in a timely manner. The tax is many times the existing rate. It is
effectively a ban with provisions for politically sensitive classes.
It is a universal
law of human nature that every law has unintended consequences. It is likely
that a new class of speculator will emerge. It will probably be the big
corporations who have access to super cheap money, who can afford to let
the property lie fallow for five years to avoid the tax while inflation rages
on. Do you really want to punish the small guys who are not the cause of the
problem, and reward the giant corporations that control and feed at the
trough of the Federal Reserve’s cheap loans? Do you want to have
another law that encourages more empty buildings waiting to escape another tax?
Vote NO on Prop G.
Libertarian Party of
Libertarian Campaign Committee
Huuuummmmm.....Phil did a good job presenting the situation to those who know what he is talking about. So very true what Phil is saying.
Although the first sentence is a nice sound-bite, I would drop it ("Don't hate the players, hate the game.") Parts of the rest of the argument *are* effectively arguing that we should hate at least some of the players -- the giant corporations, the Fed, etc. Just starting with "Real estate is a pawn in the game of global finance" is a good opening that gets people's attention.
In the third paragraph, I think the word "provisions" should be changed to "exemptions" in the following sentence: It is effectively a ban with provisions for politically sensitive classes.
In the fourth paragraph, I recommend replacing "...who have access to super cheap money, who can afford..." with "...who have access to super cheap money and can afford..." Just a grammar fix.
In the same paragraph I recommend referring to "little guys" (the familiar phrase) instead of "small guys". The unnecessary words to have" can also be eliminated from the final sentence, so it just reads "Do you want another law that encourages more empty buildings waiting to escape another tax?"
Overall I don't think Phil's argument is too erudite. I think he makes good, clear points.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
The Fed as an institution is the game, along with the other components of the system that uses hidden coercion to force the entire world to use little green peices of paper as tokens of value.
The game s the financial system based on coercion. The Fed, the IRS, and the Justice Department are the enforcers, not to mention the USMilitary. ONe could think of the Fed as the board of the game, the IRS the cards, and perhaps theenforcers as the dice. They are the game.
You are right. The corporations could be considered only players. Butthey are the spawn of the system and would never exist in the malevolent form they exhibit absent the game of Monopoly money creation .
I think that the phrase Don't hate the players hate the game adds to the arguement . The expression is popular in the younger set, and is important in setting the mind straight about who controls us.