Flight Training in Mexico

Communities can get together and agree to certain things as a group
and add those restrictions to future purchases (with the appropriate
market price adjustment for that lose of use) but that is very
different from the gov't putting limits on land without the owner's
approval.

-Robert

Well, look at the other side. When you "own" real estate, you also
"own" the character of that real estate - the character of the area in
which you purchased it. You own it in common with other real estate
holders in the area, but it is an important part of real estate. It is
what =makes= location important.

Communities can get together and agree to certain things as a group
and add those restrictions to future purchases (with the appropriate
market price adjustment for that lose of use) but that is very
different from the gov't putting limits on land without the owner's
approval.

The government =is= the community, albeit in a larger sense. And when
the local community puts limits on your use of your property, it doesn't
have your approval either - it is done through represenatation or
majority voting. If you are not in the majority, you still don't get to
opt out.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

The government =is= the community, albeit in a larger sense. And when
the local community puts limits on your use of your property, it doesn't
have your approval either - it is done through represenatation or
majority voting. If you are not in the majority, you still don't get to
opt out.

You are describing something MUCH different than I am. When groups of
land owners get together and sign an agreement to place easements on
their property either for common good or for a price that is
consensual. When gov't (local of fed) come in and tell you that you
cannot do something on your property because someone else had decided
you can't do it, that is stealing. If groups want to prevent you from
using your property for certain purposes than they need to put up the
money to purchase that easement. If someone wants to stop you from
building a barn because a certain type of bird lives on your property
they should come, cash in hand, to purchase that easement, not use the
gov't to steal that easement.

-Robert

Its funny that it used to be a very anti-social thing to move to
Mexico. Today you can get the same Sat TV stations you get in the U.S..
You can even keep your U.S. phone number in most cases and you don't
pay any long distance with IP phones. Its almost like you never left
the states. However, if you do buy a house check to see what your power
allocation is. Homes built in Mexico purchase a certain power capacity,
sometimes its not enough. If you use more electricity than allocated
you may end up running out of power or having to purchase a larger
allocation. If the house is still under construction, there is no
guarantee that power, sewage or water has been allocated for the house.
Many Americans choose to buy existing homes to avoid this problem.
However, with U.S. real estate agents down there looking to build good
reputations problems are probably becoming a thing of the past.

-Robert

When groups of
land owners get together and sign an agreement to place easements on
their property

Suppose the group of land owners is the "Antelope Lake District", made
up of the thirty eight homeowners surrounding Antelope Lake. Twenty of
them get together, and by vote of fifteen to five, decide to place
limits on how high a building can be in that district.

You are one of the homeowners surrounding Antelope Lake but were not at
the meeting. You also oppose the new rule, as you want to add two
stories to your home and rent them out. They have just bitten into your
income.

Why is this not the same thing?

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Its not the same thing in that they should not have the authority to
impose their new "rule" on the owner who didn't approve it. The rule
should only be binding on those who voted in favor of it.

But the community got together six years ago and created this
organization for the purpose of protecting each other's interest in
their property by prevnting abuse by others - for example, putting a six
story factory building in the middle of what used to be a nice quiet
single-family neighborhood.

They decided that a majority vote would be all that was needed, and that
everyone would abide by the rulings of that majority.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

However, with U.S. real estate agents down there looking to build good
reputations problems are probably becoming a thing of the past.

-Robert


/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Using the word "real estate agent" and "good reputation" in the same
sentence is pretty funny...... G

"Community" is different than land owners. If a guy lives in a van down
by the river, he gets to vote on issues that [affect] proptery holders in
his area.

So? There's nothing special about land owners. If you buy property,
you also buy into the rules that come with that property. If those
rules include eminent domain, so be it. If those rules include the
ability of others to change those rules, so be it.

You would have the same thing in reverse. An owner of Connecticut land
who lives in Vermont would be able to build a factory in Connecticut and
destroy the environment of the other land owners in the area, without
their say-so. That's also "taxation without representation".

The use of one piece of land affects the value of an adjacent piece of
land (this includes its value as a rental home, both to the person
living there and the person who owns it).

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

So? There's nothing special about land owners

That is the most complete statement with regard to land owner's rights
I've seen yet. So owning land does not give you any special priv. with
the land. That seems to well support my assertion that there are no
land owner's right in the U.S.

If you buy property, you also buy into the rules that come with that property.

I have no problem with that. That's like CCNR's. You can either decide
to live with it or decide not to buy the property. However, what we are
talking about is people coming along after you bought the land and
restricting your use of the land without compensation. That is
stealing.

An owner of Connecticut land who lives in Vermont would be able to build a factory in Connecticut and
destroy the environment of the other land owners in the area, without their say-so.

If the necessary restriction did not exist when the land owner bought
the property, the adjacent land owners should purchase that easement
from the land owner. You can't just steal it.

-Robert

It would be VERY unfair to have voting by "property ownership".

I wasn't saying otherwise. However, our current system is unfair as
well. Your taxes can be increased or you use of land can be limited and
you have NO ability to vote on the measure.

-Robert