3 ms·

A government shouldn't be in the business of telling people or corporations how to use their property.

• icebraining 13y ago
  Sure, as long as the government isn't in the business of protecting it either.
  • blueskin_ 13y ago
    That is part of what a government's reason for existence is. That's what taxes are for. To protect people with livelihoods and property from those who would deprive them of such. That's what makes us live in a first world society and not the world of Mad Max.
    • icebraining 13y ago
      That is part of what a government's reason for existence is. I don't disagree, though I'm not so sure that the only possible alternative is Mad Max. That said, historically, setting rules for how property should be used is as much a part of the State's existence as protecting its owners.
    • ubernostrum 13y ago
      The modern patterns of land ownership in Britain are due, basically, to a Mad Max world of taking what you want and having "rights" only to what you can defend by force against all comers. Perhaps a compromise in which property is protected but the protection comes in exchange for some limitations on how you can use it... isn't actually the end of the world?
• Pxtl 13y ago
  There is a fixed amount of land available in a city, and a city is responsible for servicing it. If you've a property that's gobbling up some of the city's carefully-managed land and creating an eyesore that's a detriment to your neighbors, then it's perfectly reasonable for the city to take action. You are a part of civilization. Accept it.