Posts made by hubrys

@raphjd said in USSA watch: Mar a Lago worth $300 million plus; judge lies & calls it $18 million as threat to Biden's opposition leader:

There are plenty more condos in NYC that are well over $18 million and most do not have any land use.

Do you think the legal phrase "land use" means usable land?

Land use restrictions mean legal restrictions on the purposes or uses to which the land can be put. For example, if a parcel of land is restricted to single-family residence use, then that means you cannot built on that land something like an apartment building or a Walmart. It can only be used to construct a single family household building.

If a parcel of land has a land use restriction on it limiting it to use as a church, then you can't do anything else with it. You can build a church on it and it won't matter whether it's a Baptist church or a Catholic one, but it better damn well be a church building. You can't just decide you want to sub-divide it up and build condos.

That's Trump's problem. He put restriction after restriction onto the property (restrictions which will flow thru to anyone who purchases the property from Trump) that the Mar-a-Lago property can now only be used as a social club. It cannot be used as a private residence. It cannot be divided up and used to build luxury condos.

It's a social club. It MUST be a social club. That means anyone evaluating it for purchase would have to take those onerous restrictions into account.

It's like arcade tokens. Arcade tokens have SOME value, since they can be used at that specific arcade to play skee-ball. If you found yourself with a handful of extra tokens, you could probably find someone inside the arcade willing to buy them from you nearly at what you paid for them ($0.25/token). However, hop on a plane and fly to another city, and you're going to have a real hard time finding someone to pay you the same amount for tokens that can only be used in an arcade in another city.

The utility of the tokens affects their value. The less the purchaser can use the tokens, the less he will be willing to pay for them. The same is true for anyone evaluationg Mar-a-Lago. The usefulness of the property is less than an unrestricted parcel of land; therefore, they aren't going to pay the FMV of land in that area.

But you two dumbfucks keep comparing Mar-a-Lago to the unrestricted parcels of land around it, ignoring the difference between those unrestricted parcels and Mar-a-Lago.

@raphjd said in USSA watch: Mar a Lago worth $300 million plus; judge lies & calls it $18 million as threat to Biden's opposition leader:

$18 Million is a townhouse in some areas.
$18 Million is a condo in the building in Chicago that Oprah used to live in.

Except that you two dumb-fucks can't seem to understand what I was trying to tell you.

YOU. CAN'T. USE. MAR-A-LAGO. AS. A. MANSION. That would be using it as a single-family residence, a right which Trump contractually gave away in exchange for lower taxes.

Because of the land restrictions, easements, and covenants that Trump put onto the property..... land restrictions, easements, and covenants that will be binding on any purchaser of the property from Trump..... the property, and this is the most important part so I'm going to write it out multiple times for you:

It can only be used for the existing social club.
It can only be used for the existing social club.
It can only be used for the existing social club.

That means, of the entire world of potential purchasers, you have to find someone who simultaneously has the money and desire to purchase the property AND the money and desire to run the property as a social club. That severely limits its marketability and narrows the scope of purchasers.

It's why churches, though grand they be, have much lower FMVs when they've been zoned exclusively for use as a church.

Wow, are you two stupid or what!!

@blablarg18 I'll take your nonsense response as an admission that you realize you were wrong in the OP, and now you're just desperate for a red herring distraction.

@raphjd said in Non-binary Law professor at @UAlbertaLaw tells people on tiktok to “be gay and do crime.”:

What, no link?

The sentences above ARE links.

@raphjd

The actual substantive TikTok that explains what was meant by the TikTok, posted the same day.

The TikTok mocking conservative asshats for not understanding the TikTok they ranted about.

@blablarg18 You might have been right about the value of Mar-a-Lago if the purchaser of it could do whatever he or she wanted with the property; however, Trump has burdened the property with an extensive amount of land restrictions, conservation deeds, and preservation easements.

In 1993 - "Declaration of Use Agreement" with Palm Beach to obtain permission to use the property as a "social club," wherein he burdened the property with having to obtain governmental permission in order to use the property for any other purpose than the existing social club. So, if you wanted to use the property as a private residence, you can't without the explicit permission of Town Council of Palm Beach, the Landmarks Preservation Commission, the State of Florida, the United States Government, and any relevant agencies.

In 1995 - Trump signed a "Deed of Conservation and Preservation Easement" within which he gave up all rights in the property to use it as anything other than the existing social club.

In 2002 - Trump signed a "Deed of Development Rights," wherein he granted an easement over the property to the National Trust for Historic Preservation and agreed to forever extinguish rights to develop and use the property for any other purpose other than the existing social club. This Deed specifically prohibits changes to the property, including dividing it up, using any of the property for single family use, construction of new buildings, internal renovations inside the building, or obstructing any existing natural vistas. Trump likely signed this Deed because it allowed him a massive local tax cut.

If you read the actual opinion, you will see that the judge disputed Trump's SFC valuation and Trump's expert at trial because neither of them took into account the extensive restrictions on the use of the property in the valuation of it.

TLDR: Trump's values didn't account for land restrictions which are so restrictive that any purchaser could only be buying the property to continue running the existing social club. Basically, the FMV as land is irrelevant because if you bought the land, all you could do is keep running Trump's club.

@blablarg18 If you think we should stop using electric cars because production of Green energy has negative effects on the environment, then I have news for you and your gas-guzzling cars....

@raphjd If Christians are going to keep telling us over and over again that Christ hates the Gays, then it shouldn't be our fault for listening to them.

Striking a juror based on their religious views is nothing new. It's why so few Catholics make it onto capital punishment juries. The Attorney General just cares here because it involves LGBT issues and if the State loses this case, then it will owe the plaintiff money for wrongful termination.

https://apnews.com/article/anton-tony-lazzaro-gop-operative-sex-trafficking-e4fc3e85fe5597b645e74d921246b963

GOP donor Anton Lazzaro, along with the head of the Young Republicans at University of St. Thomas, guilty of sex trafficking little girls. I guess all of those GQP believers didn't realize that the call was coming from inside the house all along.

I don't know how lowering the score by two questions will really help Delaware's diversity issue, but I can say that it's nice to see that Delaware is modernizing its process to be more like the other states.

As a part of my firm's process of hiring and overseeing attorneys around the country, I can tell you that Delaware is a bitch to find available attorneys for employment. It only holds its bar exam once a year (and I don't think it's even held it the last couple years) and the population is so low. Also, it has a residency requirement for its lawyers meaning that if you want a Delaware licensed attorney for your multi-jurisdictional law firm, you have to find an attorney willing to live and work in Delaware.

It took us months of advertising and interviews to find a suitable attorney in Delaware.

@blablarg18 said in RFK Jr attacks CIA, USA war machine, & censorship - in one statement:

Those companies cannot exist without that immunity, and they were told that if they did not censor the President's [sic; Biden Regime's] opponents and critics of these policies, they would lose that immunity...

Both Democrat and Republican forces are constantly threatening those companies with repeal of Section 230. Democrats threaten to repeal it because they want those companies to censor more hate speech than they already do. Republicans threaten to repeal it because they believe those companies disproportionately censor conservative users more than liberal users.

It's really just a race to see which side actually does it, and by doing so, destroys the Internet as we know it. For example, this message boards like this one won't survive the repeal.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/22/desantis-slavery-curriculum/

Apparently, Florida wants to indoctrinate its children into believing that human chattel slavery was a good thing.

Saying slavery helped blacks by teaching them trade skills is like saying Auschwitz helped Jews hit their target weights. It's an absurd and grossly inappropriate misrepresentation of the atrocity.

First, right-wing conspiracy nuts who think they aren't already eating bugs in their food are clueless about where some food ingredients come from.

Second, the statements by NPR are not mutually exclusive or contradictory. Eating bugs is already common in some places in the world and is advocated as a small portion of environmentalist plans to mitigate climate change.

The "bug eating" conspiracy that NPR is pointing out is racists is the "Great Reset" theory floating around in dark corners of right-wing Internet. And some elements of it could be considered racist.

So, you're meme is wrong, as per usual.

@MrMazda said in Two Women Are Told They've Broken the Law by Criticizing Male Attempting to Breastfeed a Child: Report:

You say it yourself.... SIMILAR.... SIMILAR is NOT the same. There is a difference. One is naturally occurring and the other is not.

And you are assuming that similar but different means worse. You are assuming that naturally occurring means better.

Wild almonds are natural, but I'd much rather eat the genetically modified cultured almonds that don't have enough cyanide in them to kill me. Cultured almonds are similar (same shape, color, texture, and nutritional value) but different (not bitter and not full of poison) to natural almonds.

@blablarg18 said in Report says Israel had NO covid deaths, for normal people under 50:

The lesson is: for the majority of people - apart from smaller-scale, targeted measures to protect highly co-morbid people - all those Nazi Fascist measures you just quoted & love so much, were unnecessary.

You can't know they were unnecessary because you don't have a counterfactual world within which they weren't done and no deaths occurred. They were done and no deaths occurred; you cannot prove the lack of cause and effect.

It's like saying we didn't need smallpox vaccinations because smallpox would have just went away on its own like it did. No, it went away BECAUSE OF the smallpox vaccinations.

@raphjd said in Report says Israel had NO covid deaths, for normal people under 50:

I wonder how you would respond if Trump did all this.
My money is on you would be hysterically screeching "oppression"

You would lose that bet.

Guess that shows that travel restrictions, lockdowns, government seizing control of hospital resources, contact tracing and cellphone surveillance, and home quarantining supported by government-mandated fully compensated paid leave for employees... worked to keep their citizens safe.

Just to keep our usual gaggle of transphobes honest, it is possible to pump a man full of enough estrogen and prolactin hormones to make him produce breast milk with a mixture of lactose, proteins, and electrolytes similar to a woman's colostrum or milk. And, of course, the act of breastfeeding is for more than JUST feeding the baby (as some women "breastfeed" even when they fail to produce milk), because of its effects on the baby, i.e., the skin-to-skin contact.

@jaroonn is correct about the parties switching, starting in the 1960's thru the 80's. If @raphjd had ever taken a political science class in a university, then he'd know that. But, as we all know, @raphjd thinks reading books makes you dumber.

But, for context...

The Great Switch: How the Republican & Democratic Parties Flipped Ideologies

"In 1964, Democratic president Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act into law. In the 1964 election, Republican candidate Barry Goldwater publicly opposed the new law, arguing that it expanded the power of the federal government to a dangerous level.

It was this argument that led to a final, decisive switch. Black voters, who had historically been loyal to the Republican Party because of the 1866 Civil Rights Act, had already been switching to the Democratic Party.

However, upon hearing Goldwater’s argument against the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the majority of Black voters left the Republican Party in favor of the Democrats. They saw the Democratic Party as advocates for equality and justice, while the Republicans were too concerned with keeping the status quo in America.

As the 60s and 70s continued, Democrats sought reform in other places, such as abortion and school prayer. White southern Democrats began to resent how much the Democratic Party was intervening into the rights of the people.

By the 1980s, white southern Democrats had become Republicans, and the majority of the south was now Republican. The Republican Party now is solidly conservative while the Democratic Party is the liberal one."

After Years of Political Hype, the Durham Inquiry Failed to Deliver

...[T]he much-hyped investigation by Mr. Durham, a special counsel, into the Russia inquiry ended with a whimper that stood in contrast to the countless hours of political furor that spun off from it.

Mr. Durham delivered a report that scolded the F.B.I. but failed to live up to the expectations of supporters of Donald J. Trump that he would uncover a politically motivated “deep state” conspiracy. He charged no high-level F.B.I. or intelligence official with a crime and acknowledged in a footnote that Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign did nothing prosecutable, either.

Predictably, the report’s actual content — it contained no major new revelations, and it accused the F.B.I. of “confirmation bias” rather than making a more explosive conclusion of political bias — made scant difference in parts of the political arena. Mr. Trump and many of his loyalists issued statements treating it as vindication of their claims that the Russia inquiry involved far more extravagant wrongdoing....