6 ms·

As a European, I find it crazy that a municipality (or worse, an HOA), can order you to cut your lawn.

by Faaak 5y ago

wonderwonder 5y ago
That's because here in America we are free and love our freedom! You Europeans wouldn't understand. /s
- momirlan 5y ago
  Another stereotype.
  - developer93 5y ago
    hence the /s, presumably
silicon2401 5y ago
HOAs are part of having freedom over your land. Why shouldn't I be able to team up with my neighbors to set standards for our community? The crazy part is choosing to buy a home that's part of an HOA. That's always been an instant dq for me and I would never consider entering into such a restricting arrangement.
- capableweb 5y ago
  Just like you should have the freedom to be a part of one, you should have the freedom to not be a part of one. But right now HOA works over full neighborhoods, there is no opt-out. If I move into a neighborhood like that, suddenly neighbors have control over how my house look. I think that's the crazy part. It's like a marriage you cannot leave without moving away from it. And yes I agree, don't move into such a neighborhood then. But it's still strange that a whole community can unite against one house within the gates (or whatever) and decide how things should be. Not what I would expect in a country that prides itself on its freedoms.
  - emodendroket 5y ago
    What would be the point if you could opt out? The rules are so you don't have the one neighbor with trash everywhere, rusted out cars, and so on. Why bother if that guy can opt out?
  - silicon2401 5y ago
    > Just like you should have the freedom to be a part of one, you should have the freedom to not be a part of one. But right now HOA works over full neighborhoods, there is no opt-out. You're looking at it too much from your personal perspective. If you buy a house in the sticks, you have the freedom to start an HOA with your neighbors and bind your house to the HOA. You then have the freedom to sell your house, and buyers have the freedom to buy the house or walk away because it has an HOA. Just like you have the freedom to permanently tear down your house and rebuild it, and future buyers aren't entitled to retroactively restrict what you can do with your property today. > But it's still strange that a whole community can unite against one house within the gates (or whatever) and decide how things should be. Not what I would expect in a country that prides itself on its freedoms. Again, you're looking at things too much from an individual perspective. Freedoms in the US include freedom of association, freedom of assembly, freedom of speech. Freedom means the freedom to start a club of like-minded people and kick them out. If you don't like club A, house A, or HOA A, you have the freedom to start a new club/HOA the way you want it, and so on in perpetuity. Not allowing HOAs would be suppressing community and thereby suppressing freedom. Not allowing houses to be sold with an HOA would be suppressing personal freedom in contracts. There's a difference between something being unpalatable (again, I wouldn't even consider an HOA house) and something being anti-freedom.
    - developer93 5y ago
      But can some with a house in a hoa decide to sell their house without it so the next person can opt in?
    - capableweb 5y ago
      I wouldn't consider a HOA house either, just for the record. So since I can create an HOA with my neighbors, can I move into a house that is connected to an HOA and collude with my neighbors to start an competing HOA or it's locked up to the same one forever?
- tomcooks 5y ago
  > Why shouldn't I be able to team up with my neighbors to set standards for our community? Because that's freedom to overspill your freedom of deciding what others should do with their own, self-contained, freedom? I don't understand the dq part can you please expand on that?
  - Jtsummers 5y ago
    dq = disqualification. Common abbreviation (in the US) particularly from sports/athletics. GP would consider an HOA to be a disqualifier for a home they were considering purchasing.
    - silicon2401 5y ago
      correct, thank you
  - silicon2401 5y ago
    the other commenter explained correctly. sorry for the acronomy, I usually try to avoid them without at least using the full version first
- yummypaint 5y ago
  Yeah HOAs claim to increase property values but I'm convinced any benefit they provide is undone by the multitudes of people who refuse to buy property compromised by one.
- emodendroket 5y ago
  Depending on where you want to buy it can be impossible
  - silicon2401 5y ago
    We have the right to property, not the right to property in a specific place like LA or NYC, and so on. Tough luck, look somewhere else or reconsider your priorities. Making things impossible is part of freedom. Finding a KKK-friendly community is impossible in most of the country, but that doesn't indicate a lack of freedom, nor is it something most people would have a problem with.
    - emodendroket 5y ago
      Uh yeah of course but hardly confined to huge cities like that.
      - silicon2401 5y ago
        The principle is the same. It's like complaining that it's hard to travel by horse and buggy. Nobody's obligated to keep houses HOA-free and nobody's entitled to HOA-free houses. If it's really that big a deal, start an anti-HOA movement in a community where the opportunity exists, just like pro-HOA people started HOA communities where the opportunity exists.
      - Mountain_Skies 5y ago
        Small cities have plenty of land you can build on.
        emodendroket 5y ago
        Even when that's true, they'll object to a new development without an HOA because they don't want the city on the hook for common infrastructure just for that new development.
  - Mountain_Skies 5y ago
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

As a European, I find it crazy that a municipality (or worse, an HOA), can order you to cut your lawn.

by Faaak 5y ago

As a European, I find it crazy that a municipality (or worse, an HOA), can order you to cut your lawn.

wonderwonder 5y ago

That's because here in America we are free and love our freedom! You Europeans wouldn't understand. /s

momirlan 5y ago
Another stereotype.
- developer93 5y ago
  hence the /s, presumably

silicon2401 5y ago

HOAs are part of having freedom over your land. Why shouldn't I be able to team up with my neighbors to set standards for our community? The crazy part is choosing to buy a home that's part of an HOA. That's always been an instant dq for me and I would never consider entering into such a restricting arrangement.

capableweb 5y ago
Just like you should have the freedom to be a part of one, you should have the freedom to not be a part of one. But right now HOA works over full neighborhoods, there is no opt-out. If I move into a neighborhood like that, suddenly neighbors have control over how my house look. I think that's the crazy part. It's like a marriage you cannot leave without moving away from it. And yes I agree, don't move into such a neighborhood then. But it's still strange that a whole community can unite against one house within the gates (or whatever) and decide how things should be. Not what I would expect in a country that prides itself on its freedoms.
- emodendroket 5y ago
  What would be the point if you could opt out? The rules are so you don't have the one neighbor with trash everywhere, rusted out cars, and so on. Why bother if that guy can opt out?
- silicon2401 5y ago
  > Just like you should have the freedom to be a part of one, you should have the freedom to not be a part of one. But right now HOA works over full neighborhoods, there is no opt-out. You're looking at it too much from your personal perspective. If you buy a house in the sticks, you have the freedom to start an HOA with your neighbors and bind your house to the HOA. You then have the freedom to sell your house, and buyers have the freedom to buy the house or walk away because it has an HOA. Just like you have the freedom to permanently tear down your house and rebuild it, and future buyers aren't entitled to retroactively restrict what you can do with your property today. > But it's still strange that a whole community can unite against one house within the gates (or whatever) and decide how things should be. Not what I would expect in a country that prides itself on its freedoms. Again, you're looking at things too much from an individual perspective. Freedoms in the US include freedom of association, freedom of assembly, freedom of speech. Freedom means the freedom to start a club of like-minded people and kick them out. If you don't like club A, house A, or HOA A, you have the freedom to start a new club/HOA the way you want it, and so on in perpetuity. Not allowing HOAs would be suppressing community and thereby suppressing freedom. Not allowing houses to be sold with an HOA would be suppressing personal freedom in contracts. There's a difference between something being unpalatable (again, I wouldn't even consider an HOA house) and something being anti-freedom.
  - developer93 5y ago
    But can some with a house in a hoa decide to sell their house without it so the next person can opt in?
  - capableweb 5y ago
    I wouldn't consider a HOA house either, just for the record. So since I can create an HOA with my neighbors, can I move into a house that is connected to an HOA and collude with my neighbors to start an competing HOA or it's locked up to the same one forever?
tomcooks 5y ago
> Why shouldn't I be able to team up with my neighbors to set standards for our community? Because that's freedom to overspill your freedom of deciding what others should do with their own, self-contained, freedom? I don't understand the dq part can you please expand on that?
- Jtsummers 5y ago
  dq = disqualification. Common abbreviation (in the US) particularly from sports/athletics. GP would consider an HOA to be a disqualifier for a home they were considering purchasing.
  - silicon2401 5y ago
    correct, thank you
- silicon2401 5y ago
  the other commenter explained correctly. sorry for the acronomy, I usually try to avoid them without at least using the full version first
yummypaint 5y ago
Yeah HOAs claim to increase property values but I'm convinced any benefit they provide is undone by the multitudes of people who refuse to buy property compromised by one.
emodendroket 5y ago
Depending on where you want to buy it can be impossible
- silicon2401 5y ago
  We have the right to property, not the right to property in a specific place like LA or NYC, and so on. Tough luck, look somewhere else or reconsider your priorities. Making things impossible is part of freedom. Finding a KKK-friendly community is impossible in most of the country, but that doesn't indicate a lack of freedom, nor is it something most people would have a problem with.
  - emodendroket 5y ago
    Uh yeah of course but hardly confined to huge cities like that.
    - silicon2401 5y ago
      The principle is the same. It's like complaining that it's hard to travel by horse and buggy. Nobody's obligated to keep houses HOA-free and nobody's entitled to HOA-free houses. If it's really that big a deal, start an anti-HOA movement in a community where the opportunity exists, just like pro-HOA people started HOA communities where the opportunity exists.
    - Mountain_Skies 5y ago
      Small cities have plenty of land you can build on.
      - emodendroket 5y ago
        Even when that's true, they'll object to a new development without an HOA because they don't want the city on the hook for common infrastructure just for that new development.
- Mountain_Skies 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]