Politics: J'accuse!

[Duplicity]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Slowly everyone starts to admit that, yes, the fundamental justification for rent control and zoning are the same. But I really like the idea that there is a transfer back of value to the guy who want to build a dump -- umm, Burger, wouldn't the presence of compatible uses (e.g., maybe a McDonalds or something) enhance the value of his dump? To him, aren't all the folks in the single family home who don't want the street widened a nuisance? I don't think dump guy will see the value you're positing, just as landlord wouldn't see the value if I told him that as part of rent control there will be a regulated system of annual rent adjustments intended to preserve his original profit margin, and that will add stability and thus value to his property. It's telling someone you're going to take away X - Y rather than X, and they should thank you for the Y part.

How is rent control a response to a collective action problem?

[Berry Hunter]

Not that I'm looking to change the subject from this fascinating discussion of zoning or anything, but...

Anyone have a link to how much $$ Bush and Kerry have left in their kitties to buy those f-ing TV ads?* (Yes, of course they can always raise more money.)

I'm Gerry Cooney and I approved this post.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Duplicity
How is rent control a response to a collective action problem?

Your desire to prevent me from building my dump is not a collective action problem. It is the desire of the majority to impose their will on me, the "objectionable" minority. You are dressing it up as a mutual covenant even though I have not agreed and have no intention of agreeing.

But if the objectionable minority is a landlord, oh, how you wail and scream.

Damn blackshirt.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
you're mischaracterizing the value of which I speak. The value is the agreement of others not to build something nasty next to my mcmansion. I agree not to build a dump; you agree not to build a dump. we've both given up our own rights to get more value in exchange for insurance from another guy that he's done the same.

I see no value here.

We need a dump, not more McMansions.

[Duplicity]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Your desire to prevent me from building my dump is not a collective action problem. It is the desire of the majority to impose their will on me, the "objectionable" minority. You are dressing it up as a mutual covenant even though I have not agreed and have no intention of agreeing.

That's not the rationale. If you tried to get a covenant, you never would, because it would be rational for someone to hold out. That's what makes it a collective action problem. The idea is that everyone's land is more valuable if different uses go in different places. If some people don't like this, they're SOL. If you impose the zoning requirements up front, everyone can transact around them, and you go build your dump where it's OK.

I suspect that there is a strong correlation between existence of zoning regimes and property values.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Duplicity
That's not the rationale. If you tried to get a covenant, you never would, because it would be rational for someone to hold out. That's what makes it a collective action problem. The idea is that everyone's land is more valuable if different uses go in different places. If some people don't like this, they're SOL. If you impose the zoning requirements up front, everyone can transact around them, and you go build your dump where it's OK.

I suspect that there is a strong correlation between existence of zoning regimes and property values.

Black guy in the neighborhood. Property values go down. The neighborhood perceived a need for collective action. Black guy just wants to hang out and prune his roses.

So, is the lynch mob a "collective action" problem or a crime? Is the black guy just SOL?

Come on, collective action is a farce. Zoning is just another case of the dictatorship of the majority.


(By the way, can I put my dump anywhere in your town?)

[Duplicity]

This is awful:

• U.S. soldiers who detained an elderly Iraqi woman last year placed a harness on her, made her crawl on all fours and rode her like a donkey, Prime Minister Tony Blair's personal human rights envoy to Iraq said Wednesday.
  
  The envoy, legislator Ann Clwyd, said she had investigated the claims of the woman in her 70s and believed they were true."
  
  ...
  
  "She was held for about six weeks without charge," the envoy told Wednesday's Evening Standard newspaper. "During that time she was insulted and told she was a donkey. A harness was put on her, and an American rode on her back."
  
  Clwyd said the woman has recovered physically but remains traumatized.
  
  "I am satisfied the case has now been resolved satisfactorily," the envoy told British Broadcasting Corp. radio Wednesday. "She got a visit last week from the authorities, and she is about to have her papers and jewelry returned to her."

Seymour Hersh says more is coming:

• First of all, it's going to get much worse. This kind of stuff was much more widespread. I can tell you just from the phone calls I've had in the last 24 hours, even more, there are other photos out there. There are many more photos even inside that unit. There are videotapes of stuff that you wouldn't want to mention on national television that was done. There was a lot of problems.
  There was a special women's section. There were young boys in there. There were things done to young boys that were videotaped. It's much worse. And the Maj. Gen. Taguba was very tough about it. He said this place was riddled with violent, awful actions against prisoners.

Rush Limbaugh adds some perspective:

• CALLER: It was like a college fraternity prank that stacked up naked men --
  
  LIMBAUGH: Exactly. Exactly my point! This is no different than what happens at the Skull and Bones initiation and we're going to ruin people's lives over it and we're going to hamper our military effort, and then we are going to really hammer them because they had a good time. You know, these people are being fired at every day. I'm talking about people having a good time, these people, you ever heard of emotional release? You of heard of need to blow some steam off?

[Duplicity]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Black guy in the neighborhood. Property values go down. The neighborhood perceived a need for collective action. Black guy just wants to hang out and prune his roses.

So, is the lynch mob a "collective action" problem or a crime? Is the black guy just SOL?

Come on, collective action is a farce. Zoning is just another case of the dictatorship of the majority.


(By the way, can I put my dump anywhere in your town?)

You seem to be saying that zoning is an action of the majority taken to further the interests of the majority, so therefore if we defend zoning we must be willing to defend any action taken in the name of the majority's interest. The term "collective action problem" does not refer to just any collective action.

And yes, there is a dump in my town. Its neighbors are industrial.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Duplicity
This is awful:

• U.S. soldiers who detained an elderly Iraqi woman last year placed a harness on her, made her crawl on all fours and rode her like a donkey, Prime Minister Tony Blair's personal human rights envoy to Iraq said Wednesday.
  
  The envoy, legislator Ann Clwyd, said she had investigated the claims of the woman in her 70s and believed they were true."
  
  ...
  
  "She was held for about six weeks without charge," the envoy told Wednesday's Evening Standard newspaper. "During that time she was insulted and told she was a donkey. A harness was put on her, and an American rode on her back."
  
  Clwyd said the woman has recovered physically but remains traumatized.
  
  "I am satisfied the case has now been resolved satisfactorily," the envoy told British Broadcasting Corp. radio Wednesday. "She got a visit last week from the authorities, and she is about to have her papers and jewelry returned to her."

Seymour Hersh says more is coming:

• First of all, it's going to get much worse. This kind of stuff was much more widespread. I can tell you just from the phone calls I've had in the last 24 hours, even more, there are other photos out there. There are many more photos even inside that unit. There are videotapes of stuff that you wouldn't want to mention on national television that was done. There was a lot of problems.
  There was a special women's section. There were young boys in there. There were things done to young boys that were videotaped. It's much worse. And the Maj. Gen. Taguba was very tough about it. He said this place was riddled with violent, awful actions against prisoners.

Rush Limbaugh adds some perspective:

• CALLER: It was like a college fraternity prank that stacked up naked men --
  
  LIMBAUGH: Exactly. Exactly my point! This is no different than what happens at the Skull and Bones initiation and we're going to ruin people's lives over it and we're going to hamper our military effort, and then we are going to really hammer them because they had a good time. You know, these people are being fired at every day. I'm talking about people having a good time, these people, you ever heard of emotional release? You of heard of need to blow some steam off?

You are making this all up, right? The woman got her papers back so everything is OK, and you cut and pasted some post of bilmore's and pretended it was Rush, right?

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Duplicity
You seem to be saying that zoning is an action of the majority taken to further the interests of the majority, so therefore if we defend zoning we must be willing to defend any action taken in the name of the majority's interest. The term "collective action problem" does not refer to just any collective action.

And yes, there is a dump in my town. Its neighbors are industrial.

I have no problem with zoning to keep industrial (incl. gas stations and dry cleaners, both of which are environmental hazards) away from residential stuff. So this placement of the dump does not concern me. It's a genuine health thing.

I don't see how there is some "collective action problem" that differing types of residential zoning addresses. Please define. Note that having a nice view is, well, nice, but nothing more than that.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Duplicity
You seem to be saying that zoning is an action of the majority taken to further the interests of the majority, so therefore if we defend zoning we must be willing to defend any action taken in the name of the majority's interest. The term "collective action problem" does not refer to just any collective action.

And yes, there is a dump in my town. Its neighbors are industrial.

I know, I know, if we all try to hit on fringie we'll inevitably fail, because she'll choose TM and we'll have wasted our time. But if you hit on ncs and bilmore hits on rp and fringie is left with only Hank, we'll maximize the collective benefit. The classic collective action problem, right?

But in this case, the majority is legislating the way it wants things. It's the way legislation works. And that's the fundamental "collective action" that our wonderful framers worried about. God save America!

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
fringie is left with only Hank, we'll maximize the collective benefit.

Just want to make sure that everyone is aware that any scenario that includes this situation cannot possibly be pareto optimal.

I divorced him for a reason. Actually, more than one.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Duplicity
You seem to be saying that zoning is an action of the majority taken to further the interests of the majority, so therefore if we defend zoning we must be willing to defend any action taken in the name of the majority's interest.

This isn't about defending zoning. The issue was, is it a form of wealth transfer.

Problem here is, one side starts from a premise that individual liberty is the highest value, and the other starts with the value of the collective. To you, there's no transfer if the collective is maximized. That's why there's no communication on this.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by bilmore
This isn't about defending zoning. The issue was, is it a form of wealth transfer.

Problem here is, one side starts from a premise that individual liberty is the highest value, and the other starts with the value of the collective. To you, there's no transfer if the collective is maximized. That's why there's no communication on this.

Bilmore,

You make an excellent advocate for rent control It's good to see we understand each other.

-Greety

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
You make an excellent advocate for rent control

I am secure enough in my masculinity to admit that I'm not sure which way to take this.