Would you agree with prohibiting businesses from putting up excesive signs or

[jtvang125]

Businesses with excessive advertisements and signs or painted with overly bright colors in my opinion do nothing but make the area look ghetto. Go to a nicer area and the buildings are painted using more eye pleasing colors. Conjoining buildings also are all one color and each has only 1 or 2 signs. Overall the area just looks nicer and friendlier. It also helps keep the value of the property in that area up.

So do you argree or disagree?

 

[So]

Disagree. It's called private property.

 

[thirtythree]

No, I wish American were more like Hong Kong.

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: So
Disagree. It's called private property.

 

[DougK62]

I think it's fine for a city to regulate that. You don't like it, then take your business somewhere else.

 

[jtvang125]

Originally posted by: So
Disagree. It's called private property.

True, but I know many cities that have ordinaces that even prohibits residents from painting their house certain colors or putting up a fence around their yard that's too high.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: jtvang125

Originally posted by: So
Disagree. It's called private property.

True, but I know many cities that have ordinaces that even prohibits residents from painting their house certain colors or putting up a fence around their yard that's too high.

Because bad laws are on the books, new bad ones are not justified, or "two wrongs don't make a right".

 

[So]

Originally posted by: DougK62
I think it's fine for a city to regulate that. You don't like it, then take your business somewhere else.

Remember, while you might think you're just outlawing watts, you're also outlawing Greenwich Village, Times Square, and the Seven Sisters.

 

[Tobolo]

Anyone who is willing give up personal rights or freedoms deserves neither.

 

[DougK62]

A city has the right to demand that people living within its boundaries keep their properties to a certain code. If people don't like it they'll move away and the city will go down. Just like if you buy land and make yourself a subdivision you can make fancy rules for the people that build on it if you want to.

This has nothing do with personal rights or freedoms.

 

[Roguestar]

Originally posted by: jtvang125
Businesses with excessive advertisements and signs or painted with overly bright colors in my opinion do nothing but make the area look ghetto. Go to a nicer area and the buildings are painted using more eye pleasing colors. Conjoining buildings also are all one color and each has only 1 or 2 signs. Overall the area just looks nicer and friendlier. It also helps keep the value of the property in that area up.

So do you argree or disagree?

Are you over 60?

 

[Homerboy]

Originally posted by: DougK62
A city has the right to demand that people living within its boundaries keep their properties to a certain code. If people don't like it they'll move away and the city will go down. Just like if you buy land and make yourself a subdivision you can make fancy rules for the people that build on it if you want to.

This has nothing do with personal rights or freedoms.

DING!

 

[dullard]

1) Citizens of cities/towns have the right to a livable town. That includes asthetics, the ability to see the street signs hidden behind advertisements, etc.

2) Businesses have the right to advertise their business.

Most people take the idea that they should ban one right to help the other right. Either they want to hurt people and help businesses or they want to help people and hurt businesses. I say make a compromise.

A) Have a code that applies to all buisnesses, a code that allows them a small number of descriptive ads for their business.

B) What about businesses that need/want more than the simple code? Allow that too, but at a reasonable monthly tax. A tax high enough that the clutter will be removed. A tax low enough that businesses can still advertise as they need.

C) Heck with your competitors only using 3 billboards within 100 feet of their business, maybe you don't need your 10 billboards in that area. Cutting back may even make your business MORE visible.

D) Give that tax money right back to the customers/businesses with tax cuts elsewhere.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: Homerboy

Originally posted by: DougK62
A city has the right to demand that people living within its boundaries keep their properties to a certain code. If people don't like it they'll move away and the city will go down. Just like if you buy land and make yourself a subdivision you can make fancy rules for the people that build on it if you want to.

This has nothing do with personal rights or freedoms.

DING!

Wrong. You failed to make a key distinction in your analogy. In a PRIVATELY owned subdivision, the builder can write the contract any way they want to, which is why it's okay. In the case of a government entity, it's the PUBLIC sector in question. Governments are supposed to have less power in terms of restricting freedoms than the private sector since they hold a monopoly on the use of force.

People today have completely forgotten the distinction between the government and the rights of citizens, and as a result, everyone is losing freedoms.

 

[Ipno]

All I know is that when I see a side of a mountain carved away so Joe's Truck Stop can put their crappy billboard up there, I completely stop having any business with them.