The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

MLeake · June 1, 2012, 07:36 PM

HOA's are actually a good example, BlueTrain.

Some of their rules can be absolutely dumbfounding; in some areas, it's virtually impossible to find a decent house that doesn't belong to such a HOA. In many cases, this is because a small circle of developers have the bulk of the political influence with regard to zoning and construction.

I live in a rural county area, in large part so I can be away from the types of neighborhoods that think they should dictate how people use their own property. I may get fewer government services, as a result, but that is quite fine with me.

The neighbors out here don't have rules and bylaws; we do, however, help each other out with repairs and such on occasion.

My wife's uncle, on the other hand, would not live anyplace that doesn't have a HOA. He doesn't want somebody's unsightly 4x4 or RV reducing his potential property value. He is subsequently quite alright with a HOA telling him how he can set up his yard, paint his house, etc.

My wife and I maintain the type of place that the neighbors would not complain about, anyway, but that's because we like it that way - not because some external force has issued decrees.

Edit: To tie back into the idea of the OP, many Americans see things the way I do. We don't need everything to be provided by a nanny state, and we are quite happy to provide many of those "services" for ourselves; we also prefer to not be bothered by government, to the maximum practical extent. Ergo, we are not willing to cede powers to government that it has not been expressly given. In your example, if there is no legal requirement to provide a photo ID, then we are opposed to the idea of providing one because that makes some representative of the state happy in that moment.

June 1, 2012, 07:36 PM	#137
MLeake Senior Member Join Date: November 15, 2007 Location: Outside KC, MO Posts: 10,128	HOA's are actually a good example, BlueTrain. Some of their rules can be absolutely dumbfounding; in some areas, it's virtually impossible to find a decent house that doesn't belong to such a HOA. In many cases, this is because a small circle of developers have the bulk of the political influence with regard to zoning and construction. I live in a rural county area, in large part so I can be away from the types of neighborhoods that think they should dictate how people use their own property. I may get fewer government services, as a result, but that is quite fine with me. The neighbors out here don't have rules and bylaws; we do, however, help each other out with repairs and such on occasion. My wife's uncle, on the other hand, would not live anyplace that doesn't have a HOA. He doesn't want somebody's unsightly 4x4 or RV reducing his potential property value. He is subsequently quite alright with a HOA telling him how he can set up his yard, paint his house, etc. My wife and I maintain the type of place that the neighbors would not complain about, anyway, but that's because we like it that way - not because some external force has issued decrees. Edit: To tie back into the idea of the OP, many Americans see things the way I do. We don't need everything to be provided by a nanny state, and we are quite happy to provide many of those "services" for ourselves; we also prefer to not be bothered by government, to the maximum practical extent. Ergo, we are not willing to cede powers to government that it has not been expressly given. In your example, if there is no legal requirement to provide a photo ID, then we are opposed to the idea of providing one because that makes some representative of the state happy in that moment.