Give 1,000 random people $1 million to spend on buying a house, any house, anywhere they want in this country. Perhaps there will be few people who buy a small house in nature, but the rest will simply buy a detached house in a prominent area, an apartment or an old farm in the heart of a big city and renovate it.
Thus, the smear campaign is not against tiny houses, but against the enforced consensus “that people want tiny houses”, while 99.5% simply want a normal home where they can make it their own and start a family. And this consensus must be enforced, because there is already a similar coercive consensus that we must help asylum seekers and may make room for the indigenous population.
I understand that we can’t house everyone in a house like Soestdijk Palace, but to pretend that everyone has dreamed of living in a gypsy carriage all their childhood is dishonest and ignores the reason for using this marketing: so that the government doesn’t have to live up to its responsibilities in terms of housing, failed immigration policies, And fiscal policy was derailed by transferring that sovereignty to the European Central Bank.
“Infuriatingly humble social media buff. Twitter advocate. Writer. Internet nerd.”
Case by case, the activist insists that they be climate equal
Direct | Putin acknowledges that sanctions may have negative consequences …
Trump has been arrested – the footage proves it