2 ms·
> Why have a max of two? Seems arbitrary, why not one? Finding the sweet spot implies trial end error. It's certainly not 1 and I suspect 2 is too restrictive
by galfarragem 4y ago
> Why have a max of two? Seems arbitrary, why not one?
Finding the sweet spot implies trial end error. It's certainly not 1 and I suspect 2 is too restrictive unnecessarily. The relevant is to restrain housing from being a financial instrument not to repress people. If a person can't buy a dozen houses the demand (and consequently the price) will fall.
- endisneigh 4y ago1. You can’t be in two places simultaneously - there’s no reason to own more than one house per person. 2. If no one can own multiple houses, then rentals cannot exist. Where do those who cannot afford to buy live?