3 ms·
I agree with your previous post, but I do think it's good that the government puts limits on where you build. And honestly, if we don't like it, it's the gover
by loco5niner 7y ago
I agree with your previous post, but I do think it's good that the government puts limits on where you build. And honestly, if we don't like it, it's the government we elected, and we can elect a new government. But it seems we are ok with that so far.
> The government is ... not some overlord we need to ask permission from.
I see it as the government is restricting certain people from trodding on the rights of other people. Otherwise you get things like chemical companies dumping waste straight into rivers, etc.
- yters 7y agoYes, it makes sense to stop corporations poisoning people by dumping toxins into rivers. But, generally stopping people from building on land is more in the government's interest than the people's interest.
- loco5niner 7y agoI don't know all the details, but I'm certainly glad people can't just randomly build things wherever they want. I can imagine lot's of some people rights being trampled by selfish people.
- socialdemocrat 7y agoHow on earth do you distinguish between the people and the government in a properly functioning democracy? That is essentially the same thing. The government in a democracy is an expression of the will of the people. You cannot argue that the people want something different from a democratically elected government. That makes absolutely no sense. It only makes sense when it is a failed democracy where elections are corrupted or bought in some way.
- yters 7y agoIt's an expression of the will of part of the people. No government is elected unanimously.
- loco5niner 7y ago> It only makes sense when it is a failed democracy where elections are corrupted or bought in some way. Which people can make arguments for ;-)