On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 13:39:33 -0700, "Warren"
wrote:

John Bachman wrote:

Your town has an ordinance that requires a homeowner to get a permit
to cut down a tree on his own property? Yikes!

Sure glad I live in the "Live Free or Die" state. We just tax the
trees that you cut down. No income or sales taxes but we have lots of
little ones.


So freedom is the right to adversely affect the lives of others just because
you happen to be standing on property you own?

Are you saying that I should need permission to remove a tree that
makes a mess so that I do not disturb my neighbor's garden? That is
what the OP was complaining about.


With freedom comes responsibility, or else we don't have freedom. We would
have anarchy. Laws, such as those that prevent the willy-nilly chopping down
of mature trees, attempt to balance the freedoms of everyone affected, not
just the freedoms of the owner of the lot where the trunk happens to come
down.

So society should decide whether that tree comes down? Does not sound
like freedom to me.


Simply imposing a tax, as you say your state does, means that only people
who can afford freedom are allowed freedom. And that's not freedom at all.
Whether or not a tree should be allowed to be cut down should depend on an
examination of the particular situation, and not just an examination of
someone's wallet.

Nope, the tax only comes into play when you cut down a significant
number of trees. The income from the logs more than pays the tax. I
ran into this unexpectedly when I cleared two acres of my lot to put
in an orchard, small fruits and vegetables. I suppose by your logic I
might never have my beautiful garden if some nut thought that the
trees should stay.

Sure glad that I do not live in such a place.


There are situations when trees should be cut down, and there are situations
when trees shouldn't be cut down.

Who decides in your world?

I'm not saying that just because a tree
gives me shade, my neighbor shouldn't be allowed to cut it down. Nor am I
saying that my need for an unobstructed view mean that my neighbor shouldn't
be allowed to construct a cellular phone tower on his or her front lawn,
either. The situations need to be considered on their own merits, and in
whole. The ownership of the land involved may be a factor in who can
initiate consideration of the situation. It may, in some situations, be the
most important consideration. But it shouldn't always be the most important
consideration, nor should it be the only consideration.

Who decides?

We live together on this planet. Being rich enough to own land, or rich
enough to afford fees or taxes shouldn't give someone a higher right to
impose on my right of freedom.

In my world you are free to do as you please as long as it is lawful.
So am I. That is freedom.

John