Every new development will be a "money grab". Do you think a developer shouldn't try to get a much profit as possible without fraud? If this is successful, they'll have more capital to continue increasing the housing supply, which will marginally reduce/slow the rise of rents and make buying cheaper (the two are correlated even if these aren't being sold).

Very difficult to get those approved by local government on the Seacost.

OP should also let us know how easy it was to have enough money to buy multiple properties and "sit" on them.

Rents will continue to rise as long as supply is continued to be stopped by local planning and zoning.

How about change laws on building new construction?

What would your lease say? If get a longer lease, you have no problem not getting kicked out as long as you don't break the lease. If you are renting month to month, the landlord can rightfully kick you out with a months notice. Why the fuxk would you want to stay in a living situation where the owner wants you out? Find a room to rent.

I agree. Also I don't think getting shot is a reasonable escalation of force for having drugs.

...no, I was guessing what opponents of this bill would say.

I can immediately think of the arguement from (hopefully) the minority. They'll argue this will reduce the effectiveness of police. Criminals will have time to flush down evidence, get the warning in order to strike back against police at the front door and therefore NH will become less safe like many big cities that remove the teeth from their police.

Also, SCOTUS is never granted the power to rule on constitutionality in the constitution (not that I think it has been a net negative to have some body rule on constitutionality, even watered down version).

Lol, Dairy Queen is literally the lowest tier fast food, but I can't help but feel local pride even though I didn't contribute whatsoever to that location getting top sales.

Got it,

"Pick a lane. Oh, not that lane, your solution isn't my solution so it won't work."

God those people are evil.

I agree she needs help, but there are many more deserving of help then her.

I pick the "taxation is theft" lane. Voluntary donations as the solution, but I've stopped giving money to beggars. Giving money to drug addicts enables them, other charities are the solution.

I don't want to pay to jail someone. Death penalty instead of life in prison systems if it is beyond even somewhat unreasonable doubt.

I'm not sure I disagree with you, but saying "that's the law" is somewhat irrelevant, except if law enforcement is involved. If the law said you can hunt in a unposted convenience store, I'd hope we all agree that was legal, no one should do that still.

Idk, the story op made makes sense doesn't it? Sire I'd want more evidence though.

I somewhat agree. I remember hearing for example the average Californian moving to Texas was actually more conservative than the average Texan.

I will say though that it is different when the barriers to entry are smaller. There are millions of jobs in MA within commuting distance of NH. Stealing the structure of an old joke: "take a conservative from MA and move them to NH and you'll make both states more liberal."

I have met quite a few MA transplants in the liberty community but that is only relevant if there aren't a ton of people on the more authoritarian also moving. Election success is not always a good gauge for movers average political stances as the parties have shifted (I'd be voting Democrat if the Democratic candidates held the same views they did 10-15 years ago (except the against gay marriage part)).

Heck yeah, allowed me to go on a date at the Red Arrow Diner on Christmas.

I assume you live in NH? That really doesn't refute Trannus' comment. Go to NYC and see how many on the left own guns, the big cities which are majority left leaning really scew things with their much stricter gun control. Not saying they are lesser for not owning a gun (I have yet to get one), just saying there is definitely fewer guns owned by people on the left and NH is more the exception that proves the rule (and I'm not endorsing left vs right violence either).

There is limited resources voters are willing to allocate to housing for homeless (as seen by homeless on the streets in the winter). Given that fact, would you prefer we have a fortunate fraction live in nicer less robust free housing than having a larger fraction housed in more robust (albeit less pretty) housing? I'd suggest you sit with that.

I would take concrete floors and walls in a heartbeat if it meant I get my housing for free, and I'm not even homeless. For god's sake I'm not saying they be sprayed down by water jets for showers or be given slop from a trough, I'm saying free housing shouldn't have carpet and other permeable surfaces people can wreck.

Unfortunately I think you'd need to build any public housing for these people out of concrete without much finishes. The reason most of these people are homeless is drug addiction and/or mental illness, think about the type of person who can't get a better place to stay in NH winter. Just like Pruitt Igoe in St. Louis, the place would become a wreck very quickly without huge amounts of maintenance.

Homeless people are people, but I've gotten a bit tired of people in this subreddit acting like most of them are responsible adults when we live in a state with one of the biggest labor shortages. There are plenty of entry level jobs that pay enough to not be homeless in winter without even having to work crazy hours. I think there is much more justification for providing cheap housing for the elderly or disabled that are in their situation by more that is out of their control.

I think bigger states (in population and area) will be biased towards a higher fraction of people staying. If someone want to be in a big city but doesn't like Houston, there are other options in Texas. If someone is in Rhode Island and doesn't like the Providence metro, they'll want to move to a different state if they want to be in a different big city.

I thought the use of GPS requires devices to always know exactly where the satellites are to triangulate position. I would think using potentially thousands of starlink satellites would require extremely different software/hardware and possibly obsolete every current GPS enabled device.