Why not both

You’re right. It should be all 2+ homeowners. I gave the concession because my target is the ultra rich and the rich, not just the boomers that bought at the right time and have holiday homes.

In my head I could see if we all pushed for 2+ homes instead of 3+ homes then the result would be only to tax the second home and not the 3rd, 4th, etc.

Although the best result would be to tax the 2+, i need to attack the rich and ultra rich right now. Those fuckers are really ruining it for the rest of us

In this fantasy, market rate for comparable houses, so that’s usually based on sqft, rooms and location. If you’re thinking apartments in a complex I would say each apartment is a unit and taxed fair market value. I wasn’t thinking about taxing spare rooms, just to avoid taxes on middle class. All of my hair brained ideas target the wealthy.

Sorry, I never mentioned USA. https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-vacant-homes-are-there-in-the-us/ Its about 10%.

Let’s consider a tax on vacant homes. If landlords got charged market rent for vacancies the house prices would plummet.

Grace to second homeowners or set-length renovations.

My mum did this. I made it to the first death (hawk) and ran crying into the kitchen where she was. I was 4.

Then my first husband did this! He got me the DVD and it is still unwatched in the plastic wrap.

My current husband downloaded plague dogs because it’s criterion and that rests unwatched on the hard drive because I cannot even watch anything by this director.

However, I did read the book Watership Down in college, and wasn’t traumatized. I also collect copies of the book Private Life of the Rabbit which Richard Adams used as a source book