Presumably the difference with a condo is that the condo owner has a fair vote in the buildings management (usually an HOA in the US) and enough votes can be used to destroy the building if it achieves high enough liability-to-value ratio. That does not exist for a timeshare, the timeshare owners can never band together to change the governance of the building
That's a great observation. I've always wondered while biking past old apartment complexes in Mountain View being torn down: who foots the bill for the value destroyed, and who makes those decisions. If you owned one of those units, could you just get outvoted a lose a million-dollar condo like that?
My guess is the condo votes to sell the land to someone else, distribute the money to the condo owners and then dissolve. Generally the condo isn't worth a million dollars anymore though as the building is old. Or maybe it is worth a million but you were paid 1.1 million to get out as whatever replaces it is that much more valuable (if it really was worth a million I'd guess not, but the million dollar condos of 1950 are not worth nearly that much today but the land itself is worth a new million dollar condo.
It is also possible the condo voted to tear down the building and build new - if you owned the condo before you will have one again in 2 years, but you are required to live elsewhere in the mean time. (Million dollar condos in Iowa implies you can afford a second house/apartment, while in San Francisco it would not)
Before Twitter the nazis would go to the town square of Jew filled towns and march. Americans have been dealing with this for ages and found it legally tolerable.
You have the right to say all kinds of horrible things without fear of arrest and imprisonment. This is good. The First Amendment rocks. Skokie is good precedent.
There is no logical follow-on from that that would require me to listen to, or publicise, or give equal airtime to, or care about the stupid things you say. None of that has anything to do with free speech.
Most people don't go to Twitter for racism, and yet they're getting their faces rubbed in racism every time they go, and being told that's just free speech, get used to it. The natural consequence of this is the turning of people against free speech, with deeply deleterious effects for the republic.
What am I conflating? No one is required to go to Twitter. They are occasionally required to go near the town square, and they tolerate Nazis in their face even there.
This just feels like a statement made without empathy for why people might seek a restraining order (side note: I hate that empathize/emphasize auto correct in my first comment, but it is too late to edit it). If they truly did more harm than good from the perspective of the people seeking the restraining order, people obviously wouldn’t pursue them. So your opinion seems to be from the perspective of the target of the restraining order.
The people seeking the restraining order are victims as well, sold a lie by the justice system and lawyers.
Almost anything bad a restraining order seeker is trying to prevent is already illegal. Meanwhile loads of innocent people have their civil rights stripped such as right to bear arms without even a jury trial, and often after same order evicts them from their own house.
Prosecutors will sometimes force such order agreement to drop or plead charges, even when the 'victim' believes the perp is innocent and wants to be with them. There are also all the de facto orders via cps 'safety plans' that separate parents under threat of taking the children. In many case no one wants that but the often wrong cps official.
It's the same on HN. If you say something controversial with a conclusion people dislike but debatable it will be disproven then downvoted. If the undesirable comment can be greyed out or the writer discredited they'll allow the comment to stand, smugly declaring a public victory.
However if it can't be disproven and you actually convince some people, it will be flagged. And maybe even some people stalk your account and bait you into getting frustrated and then getting your account nuked.
This is why 4chan etc are more intellectually honest imo as you can't nearly as easily censor or rule ban someone who makes a vile but persuasive argument.
Basically every free person in the US can get a 26,000 lb truck or a semi auto rifle in under an hour.
Germany has taken the other approach and implemented policies to make their country closer to a prison with all kind of harsher regulations, then reducing prison time.
genuinely interesting thought. I haven't decided if it carries any water, but interesting.
Why would harsher penalties be required in a place where individuals have more capability to do harm? That seems to place a lot of faith in a linear efficacy of deterrence
Unless you have hard requirements the visa is worked around easy enough. If you don't work you stay off the radar in most countries. If you are flexible some countries accept criminal reports from your local sheriff/police, which often only show offenses in that jurisdiction.
It rules out the five eyes countries but there's little reason for a US already rich person to emigrate to another similar anglo country.
For instance, I have read court cases of felons who illegally entered Argentina and were later granted Argentine citizenship. And Cambodia sells citizenship that expressly brags basically the king will look at it and decide if you are a douche, no criminal reports iirc.
True or not he could have created a pretty strong argument the investors purposefully selected a guy set up with all the moral hazards to run off the rails and make them cash while frontrunning a casino. Frame it as a clever deck of plausible deniability by rich elites who created the perfect recipe of a crime without actually explicitly inviting it.
We all know the investors knew what they were doing when they sent this arrogant, inexperienced, greedy sociopath on his course. Unfortunately for him he didn't realize he was also a patsy, and he took pretty much all the heat.
At her age with world as your oyster it would be tough.
At 30,40+ already locked into a narrowly defined routine of toddlers screaming at you 24/7 because of some variation of you selected the wrong color cup, and your bank account and energy constantly being drained to zero by thankless familial responsibilities I can see how someone might find it attractive to spend a few years reading in a cell and working out with the cartel bros and some payload of cash waiting to satisfy any remaining child support.
The reason floating crypto isn't viable as a domestic currency is it's a taxable capital gains/loss event every transaction, and not directly useful in paying those taxes. A recordkeeping nightmare, intentionally created by the tax masters.
