Re:Urban activists set out to sue San Francisco’s suburbs
by apendleton on Monday October 12, 2015 @01:25AM
(#10372717)
These are factors, but what's discussed in the article is not regulation due to safety, but regulation due to existing homeowners in the neighborhood not wanting their property values to go down as a result of the increased supply. That's just brazen market manipulation via control of the city government. Cities should have a role in making sure construction is safe. They shouldn't, in my opinion, have one in protecting the financial assets of incumbent homeowners.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Urban activists set out to sue San Francisco’s suburbs
by rubyfan on Monday October 12, 2015 @07:05PM
(#10377402)
Protecting property rights is one of the only legitimate purposes of government. Incumbent property owners should absolutely use their government to both protect and even improve their assets. Life, liberty and the pursuit of property/happiness.