OT - I don't _hate_ McMansions
sjansen at buscaluz.org
Wed Jun 25 17:07:54 MDT 2008
On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 12:44 -0600, Bryan Sant wrote:
> I'm just saying that if that policy were adopted by all communities,
> or worse state-wide, it would hurt lower income persons because it
> would make the minimum lot size a person could purchase so
> prohibitively expensive that only wealthy persons could afford a new
> lot/new home. I don't think your intention would be to negatively
> affect low-income persons, but we rarely notice how are addiction to
> ever-increasing legislation continuously erodes our freedoms in
> diverse and sometimes unexpected ways.
Apartments and townhomes are not an option because?
> The biggest single expense when building a home is often the lot the
> home is built on. Small lots with packed in homes is annoying, and
> maybe even unsightly, but having as many home owners as possible is
> good for society. Home owners are less likely to commit crime, more
> likely to give a crap about their local community, etc.
More likely to contribute to urban sprawl. More likely to contribute to
gridlock. More likely to have a pot farm in the basement.
I'm all for limited government, but only within reason. Some problems
are better solved by the market, other problems are better solved by
government. Wise zone can do a lot to ensure the long term health of a
community. Poor zoning can destroy it.
More information about the PLUG