Meh. I'm pro-Israel and philo-semitic, but at a certain point reparations - even for real and heinous crimes - has to taper off, because original victims and original victimizers are mostly gone. Should a Pole born in 1996 pay taxes to fund an Israeli born in 2003 ?https://twitter.com/ErezNeumark/status/1127908605255147520 …
-
-
Replying to @MorlockP
I think it's more a matter of the house at 37 main Street was our house for three generations, and now someone else is living there, and it was never purchased from us.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @russnelson
I absolutely understand the emotions. I just can't endorse the policy. Also, I push back on folks - left right and center - who have concepts of traditional / family land. E.g. "That land was in our family for 200 years until Uncle Fred sold it ... it's still ours!" Wat??
5 replies 0 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @MorlockP @russnelson
Agree, sir. Even in the example Russ provided, there is a catch. Let us say the house was taken wrongly, and sold off to person A, who sold it to person B, who sold it to Person C. Person C never did anything to anyone. Now we must take the house from him?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @VarangianSkull @MorlockP
C never had good title to it. The title insurance company would have to buy the house from C and give it back to the original owner from whom it was stolen. If you buy a house without title insurance, you are taking the risk on yourself.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Meh. Title insurance exists embedded in a legal system. US title insurance does not ensure you against claims by native Americans, bc the gov has declared those claims to be invalid.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
