[David Brauer] "My point is that some costly rules - even what seem
like onerous city regulations - do have a legitimate public purpose."
[Vicky Heller] Very true. But good judgment is necessary to balance
costs with benefits. I get the impression that a lot of people don't
understand how difficult it is to make a living, much less a profit,
by running a small, private business. Have any City Council members
ever owned a business in Minneapolis? A little representation for
this important part of our local economy would be welcome.
[David Brauer] "Again, though, some rules make good sense. The city
'forced' me to do some upgrades on my house when I remodeled, which I
believe were reasonable to improve safety, both mine and the
public's."
{Vicky Heller] The "for your own good" argument always gets my dander
up. The flip side of that argument is that many people can't afford
to be "forced" to upgrade. They find themselves trapped, unable to
sell. And potential buyers have to pay a lot more "for their own
good." It has taken me five years to bring my house up to code, but I
could only afford to do it a little at a time. I got the benefit of a
very low price when I bought the house - something that would never
happen in Minneapolis. There are many people who would gladly take a
small risk to get a nice house at a bargain price. Over-regulation
has taken that choice away from people and drives up the cost of
housing.
Vicky Heller
North Oaks
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
