tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2364362406345742956.post4279456096127373411..comments2023-10-23T09:23:05.584-05:00Comments on Live Oaks: Avoiding the Z WordBrian Phillipshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06604845862020723068noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2364362406345742956.post-9752320650860701572008-09-09T13:24:00.000-05:002008-09-09T13:24:00.000-05:00"Negatively impacting land uses" is not a legitima..."Negatively impacting land uses" is not a legitimate reason to regulate land use. If I build a better widget, it has a negative impact on my competitors. Should I be prohibited from marketing the product?<BR/><BR/>Government's only legitimate purpose is the protection of individual rights, including property rights. Land use regulations violate property rights by initiating force against the property owner.Brian Phillipshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06604845862020723068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2364362406345742956.post-91697050563644211742008-09-09T01:32:00.000-05:002008-09-09T01:32:00.000-05:00While I agree with your defense of private propert...While I agree with your defense of private property. I saw no mention of actual land use regulation. The fact is the stick and carrot approach is more than likely in the realm of public infrastructure improvements and permitting. In that realm the govt has every right to discourage negatively impacting land uses that affect your neighbor's freedom to maintain and improve their property value or in some extreme cases the health of neighbors. It is a tentative balance and of eternal vigilance. Thank you for eying the politicians as they will try to expand their jurisdiction and pocket books at our collective expense.JMWhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05786506912552123623noreply@blogger.com