DangerAardvark
Diamond Member
- Oct 22, 2004
- 7,581
- 0
- 0
DrPizza
Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
"What's that? My property value will be lower if I paint my house purple? WooHooo! I'm going to paint it purple. Please adjust my taxes accordingly. I'll repaint it when I'm ready to sell."
This is what I love about knee-jerks. This is not really a race issue, it is about taste and what is acceptable in the neighborhood to maintain property values. It just so happens that because in this case the majority of offenders would be Hispanic you, and your kind, will simply reduce it to a race issue so you don't have to face the bigger picture. This wouldn't even be an issue if the damn government would enforce the laws and keep the illegals where they belong on the other side of the river.
Jeff7
Lifer
- Jan 4, 2001
- 41,599
- 19
- 81
Stuff like this is one of the biggest signs that our population just has too much time on its hands. Don't they have anything else to worry about? Government corruption, wasteful spending, or I don't know, maybe they could go down to the pound and teach the animals to bark and meow the theme to Star Wars.
This is the same as the HOA discussion we had a while back. There was a pretty huge divide in that group.
I think it's a GOOD thing, for some neighborhoods. I had a home in a 1900-1920s historic district a few years ago, and the neighborhood was beautiful. There were also city restrictions that made an effort to keep it that way. The last thing you want is a bunch of developers buying up a block and putting up cheap townhomes, people painting their house bright blue, etc.
So, I think it's more about preserving the integrity of a neighborhood than it is anything else. I've been through a lot of Hispanic neighborhoods, and I actually like the style of the homes, colors, etc. That's their culture. I wouldn't want to impose my style of home in their neighborhood anymore than I would want a bright blue house next to mine. It just doesn't fit. The same applies for the people that build McMansions in old neighborhoods, people that build extremely modern homes in old neighborhoods, people that let their house blight to the point of almost falling down, etc. It's not a racial issue.
Like everyone said in the HOA thread, it's usually the few that ruin everything for the many.
I think it's a GOOD thing, for some neighborhoods. I had a home in a 1900-1920s historic district a few years ago, and the neighborhood was beautiful. There were also city restrictions that made an effort to keep it that way. The last thing you want is a bunch of developers buying up a block and putting up cheap townhomes, people painting their house bright blue, etc.
So, I think it's more about preserving the integrity of a neighborhood than it is anything else. I've been through a lot of Hispanic neighborhoods, and I actually like the style of the homes, colors, etc. That's their culture. I wouldn't want to impose my style of home in their neighborhood anymore than I would want a bright blue house next to mine. It just doesn't fit. The same applies for the people that build McMansions in old neighborhoods, people that build extremely modern homes in old neighborhoods, people that let their house blight to the point of almost falling down, etc. It's not a racial issue.
Like everyone said in the HOA thread, it's usually the few that ruin everything for the many.
Sigh, you're yet another politically motivated quack who always sides against whites and those in positions of power.
(And before you attempt to form a witty reply about me being some racist conservative, I'd like to point out that I'm not a conservative and I don't agree with this proposed law. I'm all for personal freedom and think that the side effect of lowering neighboring property values does not override a person's right to paint their house whatever color they like.)
MagnusTheBrewer
IN MEMORIAM
- Jun 19, 2004
- 24,135
- 1,594
- 126
I'm surprised no one has brought up historic districts. Many historic districts across the country have specific guidelines (read laws) governing paint colors, improvements, garages and building materials. If you buy a house in one of these districts, you are extremely limited in your choices which must be signed off on by the governing board.
Tough crap. A home is a place to live and grow up in, raise a family in. If you want an investment go play the stock market. I have every right to actually LIVE in my home without being browbeaten about YOUR investment.
What kind of silliness is that? A house is a very important investment for almost all people. Buying a house only to have it depreciate for any reason is unfortunate, and people are going to be upset about that.
I would MUCH rather it depreciate seriously, so that I can pay lower taxes. This home has been in my family for many many decades and will not leave my family, so long as I am alive at least.
Again, for me (and many other people, ie nearly everyone I know) a house is a home, not an investment. That's mostly because I don't hang with money-hungry people however, that try and turn all of reality into some kind of economic competition. If you plan on living in a house forever, there's no reason to want it to increase in value...except possibly for sale posthumously with proceeds to be divided amongst your family. *shrug*
BoomerD
No Lifer
- Feb 26, 2006
- 62,914
- 11,305
- 136
I DON'T plan to live in my house forever, and since we have Prop. 13 in effect here, I WANT my house to increase in value, so that when I sell it, I can make a profit. (at least on paper, since I've made payments, and done many improvements to the house since we've owned it...)
Isn't that what capitalism is about...making a profit on your investment? YES, buying a home IS an investment...otherwise, why not rent and reduce your capital outlays for things such as maintenance and repair?
Probably, but capitalism is ass. Life is better.
Because you don't own what you rent, it isn't yours...you don't make the big decisions on it, can't change it (usually), and you can't stop paying for it nor pass it on to your kids. I'm 35 and will never owe a house payment again. I can stop working for years on end and not have to stress about where to live as long as I have a little saved up for incidentals and taxes...which would be lower if the property was worth less.
If you aren't smart enough to own a place outright to experience the same security and peace it's not my fault. In my opinion my right to HOME is more important than your right to invest. You can invest in other ways, other places, etc. HOME is only one place, one time.
alkemyst
No Lifer
- Feb 13, 2001
- 83,967
- 19
- 81
Unfortunately you are only sharing space with others in a town...they can vote (as you can against it). You want to live outside the rules be able to afford to live where no one can see your home from the road or be willing to move to places that do not care.
It only takes one asshole HOA or not to destroy property values in a whole neighborhood. Once you think ahead and realize the potential to simply buy a property to deface the area and pick up additional property cheaper you see why.
Even with rules in place prior to someone moving into an area they still try to do what they want. My parent's neighborhood had some lottery winners move in and had their house of pastel colors changed to bright red with gold trim and did flamingos and all sorts of crap in the yard. They also put a big ass monogram on their garage door.
The worst part is the roof color totally clashed with it (even if it matched though the colors were horrendous).
They tried to fight it and ended up paying a huge ass fine and their house was repainted for them (at least that is the rumor now). They have a pastel house again that blends with the others.
Capt Caveman
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2005
- 34,547
- 651
- 126
Well, your view is in the minority. For the majority, the home is the biggest investment they will ever make. I bought my first house for $180k (20% down). My monthly expenses totaled $1.2k less than if I rented a 3 bedroom place. I sold it five years later for $325k. The best investment I've made.
DangerAardvark
Diamond Member
- Oct 22, 2004
- 7,581
- 0
- 0
If they tried to tell me what color to paint my house, I'd paint the word "FUCK" in huge, tastefully color-appropriate letters on my biggest wall.
kranky
Elite Member
- Oct 9, 1999
- 21,014
- 137
- 106
I sincerely hope that view is NOT in the minority, even while I hope just like everyone else that my home increases in value. There is no justification for the government telling people what colors they can paint their houses! None at all. ESPECIALLY if the only reason is that some people feel that it might hurt the value of their own properties. Do people not see how ridiculous that is? It's not a question of public health or safety.
This is the kind of thing that sounds so easy to be in favor of until the next inevitable step. Maybe you want to cut a tree down because it's leaning towards your house, but the town council said no tree cutting because they like things to be green. Feel free to fill out some application for a waiver and watch the tree fall on your house before your hearing even gets scheduled.
Maybe you'd like to put up a privacy fence so your young child can roam freely in the yard but not be able to escape it. . But the town council decided fences hurt property values, and tell you you're not allowed.
Maybe you'd like to dry your clothes on a clothesline to avoid having to use fossil fuels to dry them in a clothes dryer. Same deal.
People better wake up and see why this is fundamentally wrong on the most basic level. Property rights trump what a neighbor feels might hurt his home value. That's freedom, for good or ill.
People who like that stuff have plenty of HOA communities to live in where they can make rules all day long if they like. All the people in that community have voluntarily agreed to live by them, so everyone should be happy. People who don't live in HOAs have the right to enjoy their property as they see fit, as long as they aren't a health or safety risk, regardless of house color.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
Facebook
Twitter