2/ I've explained this before, but my follower count doubled since then, so maybe time to explain it again ...https://twitter.com/anukasan1977/status/1256601897055772677 …
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
2/ I've explained this before, but my follower count doubled since then, so maybe time to explain it again ...https://twitter.com/anukasan1977/status/1256601897055772677 …
3/ I am not in favor of zoning laws, at least not enacted top-down by governments. However, they do exist. Property exists as an enforceable right bc government exists. Sure, sure, in a David Friedman "Machinery of Freedom" society we have competing legal service providers >
4/ but in the world we're in now, we have one legal service provider. So be it. Property is, and always has been, a basket of rights. Right to build. Right to farm. Right to grow food. Right to run a slaughterhouse. Right to minerals below.
5/ ...and those baskets of rights have always been reconfigurable. You can peel off right to mine under your land and sell it separately from the rest of the bundle. You can sell a conservation easement to a non profit and still farm your land but no longer have right to build
6/ And into this historical system of Anglo / Common Law, in the 19th and 20th century gov stepped and started using zoning to do the same thing. Take the right of A to build up to property line, and hand it to B, so B can forbid him, and do the same in reverse.
7/ And given that this is the system we've had in place for 100 or 150 years, every piece of property I or you ever owned has both been encumbered with restrictions and has benefits derived from restrictions on others.
8/ So, having purchased basket of property / rights P including { A, B, C, D, E }, it is EXCEEDINGLY libertarian to defend my rights E against encroachment.
9/ No, this has nothing to do with "social contract". This has to do with black letter law / a bundle of tradeable property rights. Any perception of irony really comes from a baby libertarian understanding of things, and a lack of deep study of law.https://twitter.com/anukasan1977/status/1256602944541274112 …
10/ Given that I'm a consultant with variable income stream, I always pay my taxes 6 months in advance, in 1 lump sum (basically, 1 day after due date for previous fiscal quarter). Low risk / anti-fragile / belt-and-suspenders. https://twitter.com/SearsRowbuck/status/1256604077502464001 …
11/ I'm taking my own side, and suing the code enforcers to enforce the bundle of rights that I purchased. https://twitter.com/KekistanAntifa1/status/1256605387526152192 …
12/ Understanding things is hard. Knee jerks are easy.https://twitter.com/Gairnok/status/1256610102523629571?s=19 …
14/ I'm not asking for sympathy. I don't care about other people's emotions. I'm entertaining my followers by relaying a Greek tragedy, because it's fun for me...and for them.https://twitter.com/Gairnok/status/1256618534358171653?s=19 …
15/ Yep. And more precisely, code enforcers must follow the law and not take it upon themselves to re facto do a backdoor "taking" to help out an old high school buddy.https://twitter.com/ctdonath/status/1256619539460210689?s=19 …
16/ You are unfamiliar w NH law. Completion is not a cause for a variance & is explicitly listed as a NON cause. There is a 5 point test that variances are tested against, and they must hit every prong. This inevitable variance request likely fails 3 of 5https://twitter.com/ArthurFrDent/status/1256620067577450501?s=19 …
17/ Indeed, code is not law. But law explains that code is created by voters of the town, and demands - with the force of law - that it be enforced, via certain processes and mechanism. In NH that law is RSA 672 - 679 http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/nhtoc/nhtoc-lxiv.htm … https://twitter.com/KekistanAntifa1/status/1256637984692150274?s=19 …
18/ Sure. But "nuisance" and "diminished property values" are damage. This is obvious to anyone who has spent even 5 minutes reading on this topic. https://twitter.com/KekistanAntifa1/status/1256638283364384770?s=19 …
19/ Say what you will about popehat, but I understand his frustration with people who went to Internet Law School. https://twitter.com/KekistanAntifa1/status/1256639974692323329?s=19 …
20/ My guess is that the steel building does about $40,000 of damage to my property value, but I could be low. Curb appeal matters a ton. https://twitter.com/ollybot_browne/status/1256644192459202562?s=19 …
21/ I have no evidence that zoning laws have been held unconstitutional. Maybe this is not the opinion of Dave's Sandwich Shack, Truck Rental, and Legal Opinions, but that's ok. https://twitter.com/KekistanAntifa1/status/1256644411305463808?s=19 …
22/ Gosh, if only if tried that! Like, six times. Guy screamed F bombs at me for 10 minutes when I went over. https://twitter.com/KekistanAntifa1/status/1256645176740716545?s=19 …
24/ It takes work to have this poor a reading comprehension, but some do manage it. https://twitter.com/JamesWatson210/status/1256647777888751616?s=19 …
25/ If "purchasing rights" is nonsense, how does one acquire property rights for a specific property? Before purchase of X, no rights re X. After purchasing X, some or all rights re X. This is basic stuff. https://twitter.com/KekistanAntifa1/status/1256639974692323329?s=19 …
26/
I used to believe strongly in natural rights re property, and I got very angry at non / anti natural rights arguments, e.g. David Friedman.
Anger is often a clue.
Did native Americans own land, in a way that we recognize, before 1492?
https://twitter.com/Jq78R/status/1256759817617788931?s=19 …
27/ thoughts on property rights continue... it's kind of interesting that a lot of objection to my nuanced "property is a bundle of rights, and those rights can be traded and sold off, and often are" stance is from sort of trad-cons who want to get back to TRADITIONAL property
28/ The objection is often formulated No, Morlock, a homestead / land is sacrosanct, and a man should own ALL of the rights to his land, and this modern governmental meddling this peels away "right to build in the 20 boundary" and takes it away from a man is WRONG and unnatural
29/ It offends the same kind of people who get itchy re fiat currency or the "time debt transformation" where - as the objection says - banks pretend that money loaned out for 20 years is still usable now.
30/ On a tangent, this allergy to complexity is a thing, where people can't abstract away from the concrete to truly understand things. As they say in coding: there are two types of people: those who understand pointers and those who can't.
31/ ...but getting back to the core thing of "full and complete rights to land is the natural and normal and correct way to own land": no, that's not actually traditionally how land has EVER worked. That's a false retro-history. Land has ALWAYS been complicated.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.