Libertarianism and the Environment | Mark Grannis for Congress
What's better for the environment: regulation, or ownership? http://www.grannisforcongress.org/blog/l...
Add Comment
All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read
- 1Posted by jyokela 12 years, 3 months agoBecause you do not want something on your property is not reason enough to have it removed by the other party. Would have to show damages!Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink|
- 1Posted by mgrannis 12 years, 3 months agoThanks for the comment, jyokela, but that's not really true as a general matter. If you put your car on my property, I can have it removed whether it's doing me any harm or not. If the law showed the appropriate amount of respect for property rights, it would treat pollution the same way. In my neighborhood, for example, there are some people who like to spray their yards for mosquitos, and others who think the mosquito spray is toxic. The latter typically want our town council to enact an ordinance banning mosquito sprays and other pesticides. That regulatory strategy sets up a big fight in which someone has to decide for everyone. An environmental strategy based on property rights would instead let neighbors work this out, choosing negotiated consent (or where consent is denied, a containment strategy).Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink|
- 1Posted by jyokela 12 years, 3 months agoInteresting, I would have to think about it some more. The person would have to show that the pesticides made it on to their property and where it originated. It seems to me that there must be some harm shown. Though, if someone planted a tree, you should not be able to make them remove it because it makes your allergies act up or it changed the way the air smelled from when it blows from that direction. It is definitely more complicated then it came on to my property and I don't want it to.Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink|
-
- -
-