[ back ]
Entitlement isn't for everybody
(by Dave Lange - January 07, 2010)
COUNTY LINE, BY DAVE LANGE
Entitlement isn't for everybody
"Hey, numskull, I know what the problem is with the depressed real-estate market, and we have to do something about it real fast."
It was my old pal, Mush Limburger, on the line. Happy New Year to you, too, Mush, and thanks for calling. But, of course, everybody knows that it was deregulation of the financial industry and its greedy mortgage practices that resulted in massive numbers of home foreclosures, busted the bubble of property values and undermined investments made by conservative, hardworking people such as myself.
"Wrong, wrong and double wrong, you blockhead. The problem, as always, is too much government regulation, especially local zoning laws, too many commoners who think they can afford to buy good homes in nice suburbs like Solon, and you are not conservative."
Well, Mush, unlike the leaders of your political persuasion who took the federal budget from a record surplus to a record deficit in just eight years, I pay my debts. I think that makes me the conservative one.
"You're irrelevant, as usual. Deficits don't matter, as long as people like me who contribute the most to the economy get the biggest tax cuts. Anyway, I'm trying to contribute to the economy right now by selling some acreage I own, but nobody wants to buy it because of the zoning."
I know plenty of people who can't sell their houses right now, Mush, or they've had to sell them for tens of thousands of dollars less than they were worth just a couple years ago. And it's not because of zoning, Mush. It's because the economy's in the dumps.
"I'm not talking about simple people who think their own houses are investments, simpleton. I'm talking about real investors like me. I bought some cheap farmland with my inheritance a few years back, and the current zoning would only allow me to put 50 condos on it. In order for me to get the most out of my investment, I'd have to sell them each for $450,000, and nobody wants to spend that much right now. But if I could put up 100 much cheaper condos and sell them for $225,000 each, I'm quite sure I could make a killing. Plus I'd help the economy that you say you're so worried about."
You sound like Forest City Enterprises and their sales pitch to build 132 townhouses in Pepper Pike, instead of the approved 93 units, Mush.
"You're interrupting again, blabbermouth. You're almost as bad as some of those liberal do-gooders on the town council who are trying to screw up my deal with a big builder by not letting me double the number of condos. Even their own planner says the changes I want to make aren't dramatically different from what they previously approved."
Personally, Mush, I'd have to wonder about the reliability of a planner who says doubling the number of units and cutting their price in half doesn't make a dramatic difference. What about the people who already bought their condos for $450,000 right next to where you want to build much cheaper ones now? How will that affect their property values?
"This isn't about their property values, you fool. The economy's in bad shape, you know. The real-estate market is depressed. People should know better than to look at their property as an investment. If they want to sell their homes for what they put into them, they'll have to wait until the market improves."
That sounds like good advice, Mush.
[ back ]
