whose property?
Where does ownership lie? Where dies title vest? Who has the right to order?
"I will not sacrifice what does not cost me a price"
Indeed... how true. Basis of nemo dat rule. How can I cede what is not mine, what I do not have? To truely give, I must first have it and then give away. Inclusive chose of future rights...
Looking back, it was really a case of "where did the title vest?". I had the freedom, absolute freedom to deal, that result from the ultimate waiver. Yet, you never know freedom till you exercise that right. And until you exercise that right and later assign it, you never truly give it away.
Today, as I listened to some of my peers debating over morality, it chanced upon me that there exist 2 brands of people: those who know, and those who experienced.
The difference is clear. There is no clear line which is right, yet it disgusts me when the former group brands the whole world wrong because they failed to truly see. Bah. I strived to be both, yet I know in my heart I failed to be either.
From my amoral to be objective, I became immoral. Moral of the story? Fencesitting pokes you in the ass. Stupid Postmodernism
Back to my title issue. As I realised how my quest for true morality had resulted in immorality, I also realised the truth of how you can never truly give away what you do not renounce. The fruit of that tree gave full knowledge... to blindly lock up one half and purport to assign it is like throwing money at bankers and expect them to vomit interest. Impossible. Thus, I take a stand. Experience against knowledge. Anyday.
Today I discussed property. Property financing. My passion.
The real estate aspect. Remote, subtly warm, yet infinitely out of reach
The architectural aspect. Probable, ascertainable, defintely possible
The legal aspect. Devilishly delightful.
One man's meat can indeed be another's poison.
Mortgages, fixed charge and floating. I realised my logic is flawed. To denounce the fixed charge and propose its demise, I must cater to the reality of crystallization. A springing charge does not a mortgage make.
There is indeed a huge lacunae. Cool. So my logic is flawed. Welcome to the imperfect world...
I realise I missed up the names even as I argue my case. Freudian?
"I will not sacrifice what does not cost me a price"
Indeed... how true. Basis of nemo dat rule. How can I cede what is not mine, what I do not have? To truely give, I must first have it and then give away. Inclusive chose of future rights...
Looking back, it was really a case of "where did the title vest?". I had the freedom, absolute freedom to deal, that result from the ultimate waiver. Yet, you never know freedom till you exercise that right. And until you exercise that right and later assign it, you never truly give it away.
Today, as I listened to some of my peers debating over morality, it chanced upon me that there exist 2 brands of people: those who know, and those who experienced.
The difference is clear. There is no clear line which is right, yet it disgusts me when the former group brands the whole world wrong because they failed to truly see. Bah. I strived to be both, yet I know in my heart I failed to be either.
From my amoral to be objective, I became immoral. Moral of the story? Fencesitting pokes you in the ass. Stupid Postmodernism
Back to my title issue. As I realised how my quest for true morality had resulted in immorality, I also realised the truth of how you can never truly give away what you do not renounce. The fruit of that tree gave full knowledge... to blindly lock up one half and purport to assign it is like throwing money at bankers and expect them to vomit interest. Impossible. Thus, I take a stand. Experience against knowledge. Anyday.
Today I discussed property. Property financing. My passion.
The real estate aspect. Remote, subtly warm, yet infinitely out of reach
The architectural aspect. Probable, ascertainable, defintely possible
The legal aspect. Devilishly delightful.
One man's meat can indeed be another's poison.
Mortgages, fixed charge and floating. I realised my logic is flawed. To denounce the fixed charge and propose its demise, I must cater to the reality of crystallization. A springing charge does not a mortgage make.
There is indeed a huge lacunae. Cool. So my logic is flawed. Welcome to the imperfect world...
I realise I missed up the names even as I argue my case. Freudian?
posted by Zachary Shim | 1:09 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home