It's apparently okay for folks to rent two weeks a year and okay for someone to rent to said folks. Yet it's unacceptable for someone to own and use two weeks a year.
However, a huge fraction of the "stay there two weeks a year" folks try to rent the other weeks. So you distinguishing between folks who try to rent a secondary house all but two weeks a year and folks who try to rent a secondary house all but two weeks a year.
That seems a bit subtle. Perhaps you can elaborate.
It's apparently okay for folks to rent two weeks a year and okay for someone to rent to said folks
a huge fraction of the "stay there two weeks a year" folks try to rent the other weeks
I disagree. Few people maintain a property only to rent it for two weeks a year. Once you bother to rent it, you try to do it for as long as possible. On the other hand, people who buy one, two, ... n houses for vacationing or speculating purposes can often afford to have them empty.
In any event, that's irrelevant to my point. Be them a huge or tiny fraction, I'm not so much against those. A house that gets occupied, by owners or renters, for most of the year, serves a genuine need.
However, a huge fraction of the "stay there two weeks a year" folks try to rent the other weeks. So you distinguishing between folks who try to rent a secondary house all but two weeks a year and folks who try to rent a secondary house all but two weeks a year.
That seems a bit subtle. Perhaps you can elaborate.