August 7th, 2008, day 107; Dad; Private property; Deed restrictions; Walked almost 20.76 miles; Lat: 46 degrees 16′5″ N; Lon: 106 degrees 28′49″ W; Edited by Will’s brother, John at http://HowToTeachEnglishOnline.com ; Brooke and some cows
Ron Paul’s new book, The Revolution: A Manifesto about how America has gone off track and how we can get it back, has been released. Buy it from the world’s largest online retailer, Amazon.com, and help out the Walk For Liberty at the same time! If you purchase Ron Paul’s book through this link, the Walk For Liberty will receive a percentage of your purchase.
This entry was posted by Will Buchanan
on Friday, August 8th, 2008 at 4:04 pm and is filed under The Walk For Liberty, Videos.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
3 Responses to “Video: Walk For Liberty Day 104 - This Land Is MY LAND! Got it?”
Let’s say this is the day your dad started working on his future taj mahal of a beautiful house and yard he describes to you. He is about to expend time and effort to beautify the front door. He knows what the neighborhood looks like and knows what he wants his door to look like. He calculates if his door will look worse, same or better than his neighbors doors. If it will be worse, and he’s the dilligent meticulous home improver your dad describes, he will not be satisfied and continue to improve it. If it will be the same, he will realize he doesn’t like the same amount of value in his door, he wants more value, he wants a beautiful door, not a equal one. If he continues to beautify his door to be better than the surrounding properties, he has demonstrated with his time and money and sweat that he wants his property better than the neighbors. At each later expenditure of effort the same choice was made. He could have stopped beautifying at anytime or moved at any time. So he will not complain over a situation he took pains to create over a span of years unless he’s got a mental problem.
If he loved his beautiful house and yard so much why would he care about its value to potential buyers? Wouldn’t he want to enjoy his well-earned beautifications himself? Didn’t he spend all that effort to please himself? He didn’t? If he sweated and spent and labored to please others he ended up producing a product no one was willing to buy didn’t he? That sucks, but he spent his investment unwisely.
One simple way that the market could protect homeowners against falling property values due to neighbor’s activity is some sort of “anti-blight” insurance, either as a rider to a standard homeowner’s policy or as a separate product, which would cover me for specific changes in my neighbors’ properties.
For instance, the insurance company may simply send representatives around the neighborhood from time to time looking for potential problems. If it makes economic sense to do so, they might approach my neighbor and offer to pay a percentage of the cost of upkeep on their property. In some cases, they might just outright try to buy other properties so they can do what is necessary to maintain them. All else failing, they will simply compensate me according to the terms of the policy when I sell my house to make up for the loss in value.
Of course, the market for anti-blight insurance doesn’t really exist today because government edges out the perceived need for it. Once again, far too many people are all too willing to use the force of government rather than peaceful means to resolve such issues.
In any event, I’m fairly convinced that all the hubbub over loss in property values because neighbors don’t upkeep their property as well as we might like is grossly overstated. (I’m not talking about somebody building a large, ugly factory nearby, just the usual problem of not maintaining property to some minimal standard. You know, the kind of thing that cities love to go after people for.) But convincingly overstating problems is one of the things governments do best.
August 9th, 2008 at 10:41 am
Let’s say this is the day your dad started working on his future taj mahal of a beautiful house and yard he describes to you. He is about to expend time and effort to beautify the front door. He knows what the neighborhood looks like and knows what he wants his door to look like. He calculates if his door will look worse, same or better than his neighbors doors. If it will be worse, and he’s the dilligent meticulous home improver your dad describes, he will not be satisfied and continue to improve it. If it will be the same, he will realize he doesn’t like the same amount of value in his door, he wants more value, he wants a beautiful door, not a equal one. If he continues to beautify his door to be better than the surrounding properties, he has demonstrated with his time and money and sweat that he wants his property better than the neighbors. At each later expenditure of effort the same choice was made. He could have stopped beautifying at anytime or moved at any time. So he will not complain over a situation he took pains to create over a span of years unless he’s got a mental problem.
August 9th, 2008 at 11:44 am
If he loved his beautiful house and yard so much why would he care about its value to potential buyers? Wouldn’t he want to enjoy his well-earned beautifications himself? Didn’t he spend all that effort to please himself? He didn’t? If he sweated and spent and labored to please others he ended up producing a product no one was willing to buy didn’t he? That sucks, but he spent his investment unwisely.
August 11th, 2008 at 6:29 am
One simple way that the market could protect homeowners against falling property values due to neighbor’s activity is some sort of “anti-blight” insurance, either as a rider to a standard homeowner’s policy or as a separate product, which would cover me for specific changes in my neighbors’ properties.
For instance, the insurance company may simply send representatives around the neighborhood from time to time looking for potential problems. If it makes economic sense to do so, they might approach my neighbor and offer to pay a percentage of the cost of upkeep on their property. In some cases, they might just outright try to buy other properties so they can do what is necessary to maintain them. All else failing, they will simply compensate me according to the terms of the policy when I sell my house to make up for the loss in value.
Of course, the market for anti-blight insurance doesn’t really exist today because government edges out the perceived need for it. Once again, far too many people are all too willing to use the force of government rather than peaceful means to resolve such issues.
In any event, I’m fairly convinced that all the hubbub over loss in property values because neighbors don’t upkeep their property as well as we might like is grossly overstated. (I’m not talking about somebody building a large, ugly factory nearby, just the usual problem of not maintaining property to some minimal standard. You know, the kind of thing that cities love to go after people for.) But convincingly overstating problems is one of the things governments do best.