Posted on 02/14/2003 9:59:06 AM PST by Willie Green
Funny how private property works that way.....
Try living near one of these factory hog farms - private property is one thing, spreading a stink miles downwind is another. I have no problems with large-scale farming, but they should adhere to basic conservation rules such as reasonable odor control and manure management to avoid contaminating groundwater - and neighbors have a right to input to make sure that these guidelines are being adhered to.
Funny how private property works that way.....
Oh really? Have you ever heard of the concept of externalities in economics?
If you own property adjacent to an unregulated factory pig farm, the operation of that farm very easily decrease the value of your property. For another example, perhaps you would like someone to open a topless bar next door to your house. You might think I am being far-fetched, but in Houston unless a neighborhood has deed restrictions, your neighbor could do just that.
If someone were to build an apartment complex or residential development housing an equivalent number of people to a factory pig farm, one would be required to build connections to municipal sewage systems or even build a sewage treatment facility to handle waste water. I seriously doubt a large residential development would be allowed to build outhouses in each home owner's back yard.
Actually the problem is that the owners of large scale hog farms are violating the property rights of their neighbors. Their actions are destroying the property values of nearby land.
Perhaps Mr. Okie can help you with that problem.
Cool, stumbling distance home.
The problem with relying upon government to resolve political claims on the use of commons is that it is a power sufficient to control the use of private property. That power to control then becomes political power for sale. Needless to say, the consequences all too often refect that rather corrupt motivational architecture.
Further, the POSITIVE externalities don't even enter into the regulatory equation. The property owner thus ends up facing a single sided system and is unable to weigh competing considerations on an objective basis.
Want an answer that balances competing risks without flushing unalienable property rights down the socialist drain?
Natural Process: That Environmental Laws May Serve the Laws of Nature.
People moving out of the cities want a bucolic haven to live in so they move out to the country and then complain when the things that have been going on in the country for generations continues.
Large-scale factory farms are relatively new. And IMO it's simply not healthy to the animals, to neighbors and to air and water quality to have so many animals in one place.
However, absense of government leads to abuse of smaller property owners. So a balance must be struck, and education of people regarding how to balance governmental and private interests. So easy to say, however, but so hard to accomplish, because, as you say, some wannabe Napoleon invariably steps up to feed his ego on the power latent in the process.
I would largely agree with your statement. The problem is many of these hog operations have refused to deal with their negative externalities without state intervention. State intervention tends to be much less flexible than private contracts.
First of all, I don't think that follows. What I have observed is that larger concerns LOVE socialsim at every level and scale of government because it is they who buy the political favors and possess the economies of scale by which to afford the bureaucratic overhead and benefit from differntial enforcement and I have run the numbers to prove it.
So a balance must be struck, and education of people regarding how to balance governmental and private interests. So easy to say, however, but so hard to accomplish, because, as you say, some wannabe Napoleon invariably steps up to feed his ego on the power latent in the process.
I suggest that you read the book rather than speculate. I think that the system I propose works out a little differently than you might expect: Because every circumstance is individual and unique, the sheer complexity of managing competing uses of each individual property actually favors the smaller landowner. It's too much data and too many decisions for centralized planning, whether corporate or civic, much as it is with an economy although to a greater degree.
I don't own property near a farm anymore. Factory farms are a pretty recent phenomenon. In most cases, it is the factory farm that is the newcomer. Prior to the practice of feeding antibiotics to farm animals, it would have been impossible to sustain because of the risk of infectious diseases killing large numbers of them.
I don't have a lot of sympathy for people who buy property next to farms or airports and then complain about noise and or other externalities.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.