- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
As for the county, well, how do you spell 'Corruption'? "B R O W A R D". What else would one expect from Democrats?
But I have heard horror stories (in Broward, where I live), about people getting the property under a great tax lien sale, ONLY to find out they have to REMEDIATE Environmental Damages with the EPA Breathing down their neck. Something the county knew but was not required to disclose.
Hmm. It's like THEY write the laws for them...
LOL
This brings up an interesting Objectivist ethical question. If you own property that has no positive use, but can create problems for neighboring properties if you choose to exercise your property rights in a certain way, is it moral for you to require payment from the neighbors in exchange for not exercising your property rights in this manner?
(In this case the owner of the "strip" could charge the neighbors rent for the privilege of retaining the portion of their homes and garages that were built over the land that he now owns.)
You can't get protections for stupidity.