15 ms·

If I move next-door to you and start a garbage dump out front, this affects you substantially doesn't it? People should have to pay for their externalities. I

• Workaccount2 4y ago
  The people who most commonly hold views like this are people who live deep in the sticks. It's ideal policy for people who live in a vacuum.
  • itsoktocry 4y ago
    [flagged]
    • hospadar 4y ago
      Yeah sick burn! (not sarcastic!) I'm put in the mind of the other thread today about wrongly judging something as over-complex. What you can do on your property definitely affects nearby properties and it seems to me that we need a fairly subtle, localized, maybe complex way to deal with this. Different rules in the city/country, different rules for the industrial park/a neighborhood. I usually lean pretty "do what you want on your property" - in my town there's a lot of "we must preserve the character of our town [and prevent apartments or anywhere poor folk could possibly afford to live]" folks who seem to always be white and living in the expensive part of town. I don't think any simple "TOTAL FREEDOM" or "NO MESSY CARS" rule is every going to be very just or effective.
      • ghaff 4y ago
        I live in a semi-rural farm town with a lot of small scale farming and orchards. (It's a right to farm town which means people can farm and raise animals if they're over some (low) acreage.) No one generally pays much attention to rusty farm equipment, and yes, the odd broken down car here and there. But much as I dislike "Your grass is too long and your garden too unkempt" school of HOAs, it's not hard to see why neighbors in a neat suburban development might object to someone moving in with a bunch of junked cars on their lawn.
        • ponow 4y ago
          Those people concerned about the potential for some new neighbor's junk cars can get everyone now to sign an agreement (attached to deed) preventing said. Of course there will be some holdouts, which you'll have to bribe. So it's clear that making a local law in lieu of said agreements is effectively a subsidy to those who would have had to pay this bribe.
          • ghaff 4y ago
            Pretty hard for me to see that working most places. Why would the seller want a restriction on a property they're selling which can only decrease the value of the property? And if you're going to ban junk cars you probably want to ban a bunch of other things too. Congratulations! You've just created a HOA.
            • yellowapple 4y ago
              > Congratulations! You've just created a HOA. I'm pretty sure that's the above commenter's point. You don't need the county to implement some blanket law (that, in my experience as a former Sacramento County resident with family still there, is very inconsistently enforced). If you want to be an insufferable prick who micromanages your neighbors' properties because you're too patently greedy to accept an entirely-hypothetical and negligible drop in your house's value (thanks, by the way, for your contribution to Sacramento's housing crisis! We all appreciate being priced out of homeownership by wannabe investors!), then do what other greedy insufferable pricks in that situation do and form an HOA.
  • bittercynic 4y ago
    Current laws in many places do a pretty good job of accounting for that - you have a lot of leeway in your backyard, but more limits on what you can do in places visible from the street. In my neighborhood, with lot sizes around 6000-9000 square feet, this seems like a reasonable compromise.
    • lrvick 4y ago
      I live in an area with similar lot sizes, and front yards are gardens, gaudy makeshift gift shops, junkyards, art displays... it is pure chaos. I would not have it any other way. Keeps the HOA types from moving in.
      • Ancapistani 4y ago
        Funnily enough, that's pretty close to the way it's seen "out in the sticks". I'm happy to live next door to a grumpy old dude with six derelict cars rotting in his back yard. It keeps my property value low, which in turn keeps my taxes low and keeps the type of people away who would otherwise have an issue with my doing metalworking in my own workshop because of the noise.
  • jollyllama 4y ago
    The irony of this is the only real solution, in a property rights framework, if you care so deeply about the aesthetics of your neighbors is to live on a large tract of land. It's totally backwards.
    • michaelt 4y ago
      I believe the traditional American solution is a "homeowners association" where some neighbourhoods strictly police the length of your lawn, other neighbourhoods don't, and you can choose when buying your home which type of neighbourhood you want. They implement this entirely through covenants and deed restrictions, with no state involvement at all, as I understand things.
      • ponow 4y ago
        Exactly. Since all member property owners voluntarily restrict their own deeds, nobody is forced to do anything. It's completely voluntary, unlike town bylaws that can oppress minorities, like those who fix cars on their own property. These bylaws are clearly subsidies, because if you'd have to bribe those who aren't disposed to agree otherwise.
      • aksss 4y ago
        That’s it. I live in middle of our city in an increasingly rare SFH-zoned neighborhood, one of three adjacent in our community council. Two have covenants, mine does not. Had a choice to buy in either, I chose the no-covenant one. We have a lady walking her two goats down the street periodically, one neighbor used to have an old square body pickup in side yard with a tree growing up through engine compartment (hood long gone). I like it. My friend across the way in other neighborhood tells me laughable stories of enforcement letters and such. To each their own. Choice is good - I like this approach better than city-wide laws. One of my key political principles is that laws should be as local as possible and the need skeptically examined.
  • oceanplexian 4y ago
    I don’t live in the sticks and I don’t have a view like this at all.. Literally, the sights and sounds of the neighbor running a garbage dump is less reprehensible to me than dealing with a bunch of racist busybodies in an HOA. At least if you have a problem with the neighbor, you you can put on some headphones or build a privacy hedge. If you have a problem with the HOA they can fine you indefinitely because they don’t like you (with some convenient excuse like the flower beds aren’t trimmed right or the grass isn’t green enough), and then foreclose on your house, kicking you out on to the street.
    • mc32 4y ago
      Today HOAs hit older people more than anyone else. So, yeah, there are busybodies who complain about noise and complain about lawns and house paint.... do you know who they tend to be, immigrant professionals who've bought their first house and use the HOA to get the old folks who are slower and now of lesser means busy keeping up with the bylaws.
  • lrvick 4y ago
    I live in the bay area suburbs. Broken down cars in neighbors yards all around me. Idgaf. They paid for it and can use it as they please. These are homes. Property value whiners need to find a neighborhood of empty investment houses to police. I keep my property simple and tidy, but if anyone dared complain about it I would seek out the most absurd yard art possible in hopes of offending them and anyone that thinks like them out of my neighborhood.
• flandish 4y ago
  > garbage dump We already have laws re environment. What really seems to happen with these discussions is dog whistles for “i don’t want them poors next door.”
  • Tyrek 4y ago
    The difficulty here, as in many cases, comes down to uneven enforcement and unclear lines. Consider the typical example of a consistently noisy neighbor and filing a noise complaint - in many/most cases, often nothing gets done.
    • flandish 4y ago
      That difficulty lies in the system - which can be resolved/upgraded via various means. But the “concept” of one’s property as investment “outranking” one’s property as a homestead is, in my mind, part of the core concern here. Maybe it’s too “meta” but we already have laws re noise, etc as well as a system in place to modify broken laws. Appreciate your reply!
  • SyzygistSix 4y ago
    Or weirdos who like art and vegetable gardens.
  • mc32 4y ago
    Not necessarily so. Lots of expensive developments have HOAs so it's not about making life difficult for people of little means as they cannot afford property in these places -or even rent in these places. Yet, the neighborhood want to have some governance over the development. I prefer less oversight, but some oversight is appreciated to keep things from becoming unmanageable. On the other hand trailer parks, where many poor live, seem to not care much about appearance.
• zoklet-enjoyer 4y ago
  A garbage dump could stink up the place and create a health hazard. Some broken down cars won't hurt you
  • xjlin0 4y ago
    Sure about it? I've seen broken down cars leaking oil to the ground.
    • zoklet-enjoyer 4y ago
      I've seen running cars leak oil and antifreeze
    • yellowapple 4y ago
      Wait until you hear about what fully-functional cars routinely leak into the ground and atmosphere :)
    • jandrese 4y ago
      Certainly the total level of contamination is like 5 quarts of oil in this case? Unless the person is constantly refilling their leaking junker? Maybe offer them a drip pan? Military vehicles often have dedicated drip pans that they put under the vehicle every time they are parked because it's easier to do that than fix the leaks.
      • rascul 4y ago
        > Military vehicles often have dedicated drip pans that they put under the vehicle every time they are parked because it's easier to do that than fix the leaks. In the units I was in, any vehicle that had any fluids in the drip pan would get a thorough check next Monday to find the leak and would be in the shop as soon as the part came in.
  • Volundr 4y ago
    While I'm largely in the camp of "it's my property I can do what I want" (this is why I made sure to buy a house without an HOA) the idea that a broken down car sitting there can't affect someone beyond being an eyesore isn't necessary true. I can say from personal experience that even a car that was in decent shape when it was parked over a sufficient number of years will dump it's miscellaneous fluids on the ground, get really smelly as the interior starts to decay and become home to any number of insects and wildlife. I also wouldn't care to speculate on what the tires, paint and metals are leeching into the ground as they slowly degrade. Sure this isn't going to be an issue with a car on blocks for a few months, even a year, but I've seen cars essentially abandoned long enough if you wanted to move them you'll have to literally dig them out and remove them in pieces.
• BurningFrog 4y ago
  If bad smell or clouds of insects enter your property, I'm no longer just affecting my property. If my property just looks untidy, it's much harder for me to accept you have a case.
  • underdeserver 4y ago
    It does affect my property, because if I want to sell my house it has less value if my neighbors are filthy. Would you like to live next to a garbage dump?
    • yellowapple 4y ago
      Your first mistake was treating your house as a speculative asset instead of a house. Pardon me if I don't give an iota of a rodent's buttocks about your precious "property value".
      • underdeserver 4y ago
        I'm not rich. I don't have a portfolio of properties. It's not a speculative asset, it's where I poured all my life savings into. And if I need to move, it can make a difference between a small, cramped apartment and a spacious, livable one where I'm moving to.
        • burntwater 4y ago
          Pouring all your live savings into a single asset is your personal choice. It still doesn't change the argument that a home should not be a treated as an investment vehicle. Even if you do choose to use a home as an investment vehicle, putting ALL your life savings into is a poor choice; you should probably downsize and split the savings among other vehicles.
          • underdeserver 4y ago
            It's not an investment vehicle. I just didn't want to be beholden to landlords, so I bought where I live, and it's expensive. There's not a lot of room for downsizing.
• ponow 4y ago
  No, you can bribe your neighbors to sign contracts to avoid whatever non-violent behavior disgusts you. Getting some majority of your friends to make a local law to do it is just a subsidy, paid for by the people whose behavior is physically harmless behavior is being constrained. Not everyone has the same pursuit of happiness.
• friend_and_foe 4y ago
  Having a garbage dump and having a car that needs work are not the same thing. Why is it that when these discussions come up the proponents for controlling other peoples behavior always bring these ridiculous over the top strawmen with obvious answers? Why not something like "if I throw a candy wrapper in my yard and it blows into your yard that affects you doesn't it?" The same point is made, but then it becomes obvious what is and isn't an externality: me having a car in my driveway with a flat tire is not causing a negative externality for you. Me piling garbage in my yard does.
  • pwg 4y ago
    > Why is it that when these discussions come up the proponents for controlling other peoples behavior always bring these ridiculous over the top stawmen with obvious answers? Because if the proponents expressed their real reason, it would sound petty or racist, and as they don't want to sound petty or racist, they have to invent "ridiculous over the top st[r]awmen" to hide their real underlying reason from view.
• logicalmonster 4y ago
  HOAs deservedly sometimes get a bad rap for some power-tripping leaders and busy-body neighbors out there, but this is where I think HOAs can be useful. People who don't want to risk having an eyesore next to their house should choose to move to a neighborhood with an HOA. People who value personal freedom on their property should choose to move to an area without that. In theory, everybody should be happier.
  • Gracana 4y ago
    Unfortunately, in some places it can be very difficult to avoid HOAs. In my area they are nearly ubiquitous.
  • jandrese 4y ago
    Sadly HOAs are mostly powerless in these situations. They can send angry letters to the homeowners and even threaten them with leins against their house, but actually getting those liens is a time consuming and expensive process so they usually won't actually do it. Plus they aren't a penalty to someone who is never planning to sell the property. They'll leave when they die or when the bank forecloses on them. HOAs only have power of people who actually care about being a good neighbor. They're basically only useful for harassing honest people and maintaining shared spaces. You only need a HOA if your community has a pool/park/community center/parking lot that is owned by said community.
• dsfyu404ed 4y ago
  As long as it's in compliance with the existing runoff and and "downwind smells" rules that apply to such facilities (which you are probably ignorant of or you wouldn't be making this comment) I don't really give a crap. It's his property. My right to do whatever is predicated on his right to do whatever. Source: I live by a dump. You wouldn't even know it was there if it weren't for the obvious dump traffic.
• AlexandrB 4y ago
  > People should have to pay for their externalities. I think this sounds nice in theory, but you open to door to neighbours expecting payment for positive externalities as well. "I just renovated my driveway and slightly increased your property value, pay me." It also seems absurd to manage relationships between people living meters from each other by the same mechanisms we manage the operations of multi-billion dollar corporations. What next? Charging your kids for services rendered after raising them?
  • NegativeLatency 4y ago
    > I just renovated my driveway and slightly increased your property value, pay me. Sounds similar to the result of having an HOA/condo association, shared payment for maintenance upkeep and improvements