“omg theres a small subset of America who might be mildly inconvenienced when we ensure housing is affordable for everyone.” yep, a hell of a talking point.
And an individual farmer live in multiple houses? Nope. One of those houses is a viable residence and the rest are typically rented out in my experience. The exact behavior were trying to discourage.
It’s not only liability. It’s taxes, accounting, or just keeping a clear delineation between the family’s assets and the farm’s in the event of a sale.
Oh, and while we’re at it, this proposal would also forbid multi-family homes coming under a co-op model. That’s just another kind of corporate structure.
You’re handing your opponents a talking point against it before you even start.
“omg theres a small subset of America who might be mildly inconvenienced when we ensure housing is affordable for everyone.” yep, a hell of a talking point.
Farmers. They’re part of the working class, and they’re important.
And an individual farmer live in multiple houses? Nope. One of those houses is a viable residence and the rest are typically rented out in my experience. The exact behavior were trying to discourage.
The proposal above doesn’t make a distinction between first and second homes, only that a corporation owns it.
So your arguing in support of corporate farms being able to own homes? Not sure why anyone but the corporate farms would care about that.
Pretty much all of them are under a corporate structure, even when it’s a single family.
Which is fucked up to begin with. Stop hiding personal assets behind corporate liability protections.
It’s not only liability. It’s taxes, accounting, or just keeping a clear delineation between the family’s assets and the farm’s in the event of a sale.
Oh, and while we’re at it, this proposal would also forbid multi-family homes coming under a co-op model. That’s just another kind of corporate structure.