> The argument operates on a spectrum of specifics, and line drawing is always going to look absurd to someone. No doubt. My point is exactly that you have to

> The argument operates on a spectrum of specifics, and line drawing is always going to look absurd to someone. No doubt. My point is exactly that you have to find a balance somewhere, and it can't just be first come first serve. Because of fire risk we have a law that there can't be trees less than X meters from a house. That means someone can take a lot, build a house on the border and then force the neighbor to remove some trees. For the laws to work well together it should be required that someone building a house outright owns or at least buys the rights to the area that now needs to be cleared of trees. The Sriracha example is another tricky one. Just because when you started there was no one around you doesn't mean you get to pollute the air around you at will, but maybe industrial zoning of the area would have made that use ok. It's all a balancing act. Since local zoning tends to be both short-sighted and corrupt these issues crop up a lot.