Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First of all, I can guarantee that the founding fathers did not create zoning laws or minimum lot sizes.
Secondly, nobody keeps poor people from acquiring property. When I bought my first property, I was poor. I scrimped, saved, and went without to buy a home. You and I had the same opportunity to buy a home. You chose not to.
And lastly, if you create a slum out of my neighborhood, you are most certainly taking my property/investment from me. If you want to live like that, move somewhere that already allows it. Don't change the rules for me just because you want to live in a certain area.
so what would thhe founders say about zoning and minimum lot sizes?
did i have the same income as you? if not, how did i choose not to buy a home?
sounds like you're saying your neighborhood is special and should be exempt from the free market.
are you allowed to sublet? I bet the owner would be really peeved when they miss out on income like that
No, can't sublet. It's practically a motel in summer though, all my relatives and every friend I ever had wants to come stay here over the summer.
It's the owner's choice not to rent weekly. It's a PITA, he is elderly and he and his kids are already wealthy, through their profession and owning multiple properties, including stores on the boardwalk (where the rent is often $100,000 a year or more). He just wants peace and good people here who won't cause any trouble. His daughter told me once that his accountants beg him to raise the rents and he won't. My rent has gone up by exactly $87 a month in the 15 years I've lived here.
Oh yea, that's right. You only set your sights on that ONE THING, and if it doesn't pan out, you curl into a fetal position and give up. I forgot.
When you're poor, your options - especially housing options - are rather limited. That was the only potential ownership option I had found at that time. And the place in which I was living, well it took four months of pavement pounding and (news)paper perusal to find. And I got it only because I called first thing in the morning the first day the ad ran; ten minutes later I would have been too late.
No, can't sublet. It's practically a motel in summer though, all my relatives and every friend I ever had wants to come stay here over the summer.
It's the owner's choice not to rent weekly. It's a PITA, he is elderly and he and his kids are already wealthy, through their profession and owning multiple properties, including stores on the boardwalk (where the rent is often $100,000 a year or more). He just wants peace and good people here who won't cause any trouble. His daughter told me once that his accountants beg him to raise the rents and he won't. My rent has gone up by exactly $87 a month in the 15 years I've lived here.
There are all sorts of owners with all sorts of situations and strategies. It's great you found an elderly owner who is content with a low-maintenance, stable, paying tenant. I'm guessing your owner wants to leave the property to a family member; I had a similar situation renting below market from a retired teacher who was holding the property in order to leave it to her kids; she was thrilled to have low turnover (the family in the other unit was there ten years and I was there longer than that) and minimal hassle. Pretty much all the other landlords in town preferred the high rents they got with yearly turnover.
so what would thhe founders say about zoning and minimum lot sizes?
did i have the same income as you? if not, how did i choose not to buy a home?
sounds like you're saying your neighborhood is special and should be exempt from the free market.
They probably would say what we say today - let the folks in the area (town, county, state) decide for themselves how they want their community to look.
No, you did not have the same income as me. But you DID have the same opportunity as me. You grew up less than wealthy, took loans out for college at roughly the same time, and embarked on your working life at the same time as I did. The fact that, in spite of these things, you didn't have the same income as me says you squandered the opportunities afforded you. In fact, you had a little advantage over me - you actually graduated from college, and you are a man. Both "should" indicate a higher income than I have. So to answer your question, you DID choose to not buy a home. Through your life choices and constant "waiting for my ship to come in" you set up a life course that means you will never own a home.
My neighborhood is not special. But it's been in existence for over 50 years, when the zoning to put minimum lot sizes was put into place. How dare you decide that just because our neighborhood is something desirable it should be turned into a slum because there are folks out there that want their cake and eat it too.
They probably would say what we say today - let the folks in the area (town, county, state) decide for themselves how they want their community to look.
No, you did not have the same income as me. But you DID have the same opportunity as me. You grew up less than wealthy, took loans out for college at roughly the same time, and embarked on your working life at the same time as I did. The fact that, in spite of these things, you didn't have the same income as me says you squandered the opportunities afforded you. In fact, you had a little advantage over me - you actually graduated from college, and you are a man. Both "should" indicate a higher income than I have. So to answer your question, you DID choose to not buy a home. Through your life choices and constant "waiting for my ship to come in" you set up a life course that means you will never own a home.
My neighborhood is not special. But it's been in existence for over 50 years, when the zoning to put minimum lot sizes was put into place. How dare you decide that just because our neighborhood is something desirable it should be turned into a slum because there are folks out there that want their cake and eat it too.
So they would have no problem with class warfare as long as it's local?
I got a steppingstone degree which became useless when I couldn't afford the next step; my degree is perhaps worse than worthless because it made me ineligible for a Pell Grant which might have helped me get a useful degree.
Shrug, all I'm saying is that it should be up to a property owner to sell all, part or none of their property, and should be lawful for a buyer to occupy, subject to reasonable health and safety requirements such as proper setbacks.
So they would have no problem with class warfare as long as it's local?
I got a steppingstone degree which became useless when I couldn't afford the next step; my degree is perhaps worse than worthless because it made me ineligible for a Pell Grant which might have helped me get a useful degree.
Shrug, all I'm saying is that it should be up to a property owner to sell all, part or none of their property, and should be lawful for a buyer to occupy, subject to reasonable health and safety requirements such as proper setbacks.
It should be up to the community to decide how dense they want their area. You are calling for potential densities similar to Mumbai. I don't want to live like that. If you do, find that area and MOVE there.
A steppingstone degree is still a college degree. And a step up from what I had, which is no degree. And there you go again with that "one thing" that would have made your life a success. The fact remains that you and I set out at the same period of time with the same opportunities. I chose to make lemonade.
It should be up to the community to decide how dense they want their area. You are calling for potential densities similar to Mumbai. I don't want to live like that. If you do, find that area and MOVE there.
A steppingstone degree is still a college degree. And a step up from what I had, which is no degree. And there you go again with that "one thing" that would have made your life a success. The fact remains that you and I set out at the same period of time with the same opportunities. I chose to make lemonade.
How is that distinguishable from class warfare? e.g. those hoity-toity towns with five-acre minimums that keep put the 99 percent or the extensive existence of houses that can be independently rented but not independently owned.
What's to stop a group of communities from using zoning for class exclusion
from a town or region? Conservatives seem to never have a good answer to this question.
A steppingstone degree outside of STEM during a deep recession in the Rust Belt is fairly useless.
How is that distinguishable from class warfare? e.g. those hoity-toity towns with five-acre minimums that keep put the 99 percent or the extensive existence of houses that can be independently rented but not independently owned.
What's to stop a group of communities from using zoning for class exclusion
from a town or region? Conservatives seem to never have a good answer to this question.
A steppingstone degree outside of STEM during a deep recession in the Rust Belt is fairly useless.
I'm not sure whether zoning laws are a liberal or conservative thing, but they're definitely anti-free market. I'd happily join a movement to change local zoning laws, but the numerous homeowners don't want to hurt their property values by allowing more development, so there is no way such laws could be changed.
I'm not sure whether zoning laws are a liberal or conservative thing, but they're definitely anti-free market. I'd happily join a movement to change local zoning laws, but the numerous homeowners don't want to hurt their property values by allowing more development, so there is no way such laws could be changed.
Fortunately, there is at least one intellectually honest conservative; Thomas Sowell proved that zoning redistributes income from renters to owners, and thus generally upward. (Markets and Minorities, Chapter 7, 1981)
Zoning is protectonism for incumbent property owners; rent control is merely the mirror image; namely, protectionism for incumbent renters. Amazing how conservatives blast rent control while cozying up to zoning.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
