3 ms·
Recognizing that it sounds bad is easy. Figuring out something that would actually be better in the long run for society is hard. Any takers? (Also, the "pro
by downerending 7y ago
Recognizing that it sounds bad is easy. Figuring out something that would actually be better in the long run for society is hard.
Any takers?
(Also, the "profit" part is a red herring. There's no way the county could have done all of this for less than the proceeds of the sale.)
- rtkwe 7y agoFor starters there's already the concept of garnishing wages, income and tax returns the city could easily use those for cases like this. Sure there will be some cases where an action like this is reasonable but just sending notifications through the mail isn't enough they should have to use more active services like those for serving court documents where it can be validated that the owner received notification of the action, or at least a more rigorous effort was put in than just sending a letter.
- PhasmaFelis 7y ago> Recognizing that it sounds bad is easy. Figuring out something that would actually be better in the long run for society is hard. Per the article, this is only possible in Michigan, and only because of a specific, misguided law passed in 1999. It's a solved problem.
- 0_gravitas 7y agoI've never liked this kind of hand-wavy reasoning on any topic, its unreasonably dismissive and to me always seems externally motivated in one way or another. "The situation is slightly more than mildly complex, therefore, you shouldn't be complaining or calling it 'wrong' if you don't have a complete near-zero-cost solution in your hands right now!" This, besides just being unreasonable, also seems to just willingly forget that figuring out the 'better system' is not our job, it completely ignores the fact that that is quite literally the supposed job of the actual serving politicians that we elected.