Exactly right. We have WAAAAY too much government meddling going on in America today, at every level, federal down to city. It's much easier to see the damage done by wasting so many precious resources on worthless government spending, than it is to see the entrepreneurial enterprises that never were because of suffocating government regulations, but both are eventually ruinous to any society that does not hold them in check. You've chosen an excellent example here to illustrate the latter.
It's not just America. It's virtually everywhere in the Western developed world. My aunt's friend owned an old dilapidated farmhouse in the UK which she wanted to develop into a conversion. The planning authorities denied permission. The reason given was that they didn't want people living out in the countryside- because it would be more expensive for the state to care for them when they were elderly. The couple instead were forced to set up a glamping business. which is only moderately profitable and a major imposition on their time.
And people wonder why there is a housing crisis in the UK. Restrictions like this would have a major impact on any commodity, but especially one known for its potential for scarcity. Building land in the South is now one million pound per acre- roughly enough space to build six adequate houses, or a few more rabbit hutches. In the North of England it's around £300K per acre.
Every politician who comes along takes the safe route of promising to develop brown belt land. There is simply not enough of it. The only reason why the UK doesn't have your homeless problem is that, in a rare show of acumen, the government allowed for a significant conversion of redundant commercial office space into emergency 'temporary' housing.
Not sure where you posted this the first time (FEE?), but I remember reading it long ago and am glad you re-posted/updated it.
Was this (in 2011) your first use of the Makers/Takers construct? It is effective and I have used it over the years in conversations about the difference between entrepreneurship and cronyism.
I knew you left Austin for NC but didn’t know it was actually a return for you. Hope all is well there!
Bill! So bizarrely, I left Austin for SC, despite being a Tar Heel. It's weird, but I'm only 45 minutes away from the state line. (Note: you probably saw it in Superwealth.)
A great essay in more than one way, delivered with a deft touch. I particularly liked the Jane Jacobs reference, especially at a time when city planners are attempting to remove cars from the shopping and leisure experience, with predictably disastrous consequences for the main/high street. Perhaps the multiplicity of individual human decisions is to be found in a variant of an old children's fable, Goldilocks. Cars- not too few, not too many- predicated upon choice.
The best evidence tends to suggest that people only switch behaviour when the alternative offered is markedly superior in terms of convenience, cost and reliability, without deliberately sabotaging the original alternative. In this case, the answer would appear to be short-range rail, expanding commuter belts and adding libertarian competition to the housing market, especially in terms of furnishing a generation of starter homes.
For those unfamiliar with Jane Jacobs, there is an excellent documentary on the subject:
Thanks, Max, for a much needed article on the Free/d Market as enabler for individualist Makers and disabler for collectivist Takers.
The conundrum and paradox for believers in Free Trade that needs to be understood and obviated (and I consider this can only be done by establishing peaceful parenting that will break the child abuse-neglect historical syndrome that breeds the power hungry damned and damage who need to damn and damage), is that given the iron law of Oligarchy demonstrated in history, it is the freest market that enables the most totalitarian State.
See Stephen Molyneux on this:
“The growth of the state is always proportional to the preceding economic freedoms. Economic freedoms create wealth, and the wealth attracts more thieves and political parasites, whose greed then destroys the economic freedoms. In other words, freedom metastasizes the cancer of the state. The government that starts off the smallest will always end up the largest.” Stefan Molyneux - The Story of Your Enslavement – Video https://www.bitchute.com/video/DJYcitKklRdm/
Exactly right. We have WAAAAY too much government meddling going on in America today, at every level, federal down to city. It's much easier to see the damage done by wasting so many precious resources on worthless government spending, than it is to see the entrepreneurial enterprises that never were because of suffocating government regulations, but both are eventually ruinous to any society that does not hold them in check. You've chosen an excellent example here to illustrate the latter.
It's not just America. It's virtually everywhere in the Western developed world. My aunt's friend owned an old dilapidated farmhouse in the UK which she wanted to develop into a conversion. The planning authorities denied permission. The reason given was that they didn't want people living out in the countryside- because it would be more expensive for the state to care for them when they were elderly. The couple instead were forced to set up a glamping business. which is only moderately profitable and a major imposition on their time.
And people wonder why there is a housing crisis in the UK. Restrictions like this would have a major impact on any commodity, but especially one known for its potential for scarcity. Building land in the South is now one million pound per acre- roughly enough space to build six adequate houses, or a few more rabbit hutches. In the North of England it's around £300K per acre.
Every politician who comes along takes the safe route of promising to develop brown belt land. There is simply not enough of it. The only reason why the UK doesn't have your homeless problem is that, in a rare show of acumen, the government allowed for a significant conversion of redundant commercial office space into emergency 'temporary' housing.
Well done. Fun read for this North Carolinian.
Not sure where you posted this the first time (FEE?), but I remember reading it long ago and am glad you re-posted/updated it.
Was this (in 2011) your first use of the Makers/Takers construct? It is effective and I have used it over the years in conversations about the difference between entrepreneurship and cronyism.
I knew you left Austin for NC but didn’t know it was actually a return for you. Hope all is well there!
Bill! So bizarrely, I left Austin for SC, despite being a Tar Heel. It's weird, but I'm only 45 minutes away from the state line. (Note: you probably saw it in Superwealth.)
A great essay in more than one way, delivered with a deft touch. I particularly liked the Jane Jacobs reference, especially at a time when city planners are attempting to remove cars from the shopping and leisure experience, with predictably disastrous consequences for the main/high street. Perhaps the multiplicity of individual human decisions is to be found in a variant of an old children's fable, Goldilocks. Cars- not too few, not too many- predicated upon choice.
The best evidence tends to suggest that people only switch behaviour when the alternative offered is markedly superior in terms of convenience, cost and reliability, without deliberately sabotaging the original alternative. In this case, the answer would appear to be short-range rail, expanding commuter belts and adding libertarian competition to the housing market, especially in terms of furnishing a generation of starter homes.
For those unfamiliar with Jane Jacobs, there is an excellent documentary on the subject:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b090c4f8
It's currently available to rent or buy on Prime and further details can be found on IMDb.
Thanks, Max, for a much needed article on the Free/d Market as enabler for individualist Makers and disabler for collectivist Takers.
The conundrum and paradox for believers in Free Trade that needs to be understood and obviated (and I consider this can only be done by establishing peaceful parenting that will break the child abuse-neglect historical syndrome that breeds the power hungry damned and damage who need to damn and damage), is that given the iron law of Oligarchy demonstrated in history, it is the freest market that enables the most totalitarian State.
See Stephen Molyneux on this:
“The growth of the state is always proportional to the preceding economic freedoms. Economic freedoms create wealth, and the wealth attracts more thieves and political parasites, whose greed then destroys the economic freedoms. In other words, freedom metastasizes the cancer of the state. The government that starts off the smallest will always end up the largest.” Stefan Molyneux - The Story of Your Enslavement – Video https://www.bitchute.com/video/DJYcitKklRdm/
Get free, stay free.