Posted on 10/22/2009 5:38:34 PM PDT by JoeProBono
Some people have already lived in an area for a long time, have a job there, have elderly relatives there, etc. Having children often requires moving to a larger residence, and if the local politician-developer huddle has seen to it that everything in your price range has a homeowners association, there is often realistically no choice. I don’t think people should be expected to quite their jobs, move away from relatives, etc. just so the local politicians and developers can continue to run the community as a money factory for themselves.
I fully realize that there are many people who did have a choice, and start whining about the rules after they move in, but there are certainly some who don’t. And as I noted in an earlier post, in some states, including my home state of Pennsylvania, state law allows groups of homeowners in an area to form a homeowners association where none previously existed, and force existing homeowners into it if there are a few holdouts who don’t want it.
You know, everyone else is TOTALLY right. How dare people enforce contracts? I think that ALL contracts are uncompassionate. I think that interest on my car is evil, so I just won’t pay it anymore. That’s moral, right? I mean, the Bible says that usury is immoral, so I can stop paying interest, right? Legally binding contracts that I signed be ****ed.
By the way, to all of the people who feel that moving into a HOA is mandatory, it’s not. Usually, people move into a HOA because the neighborhoods are nice. Those neighborhoods are nice BECAUSE of the contracts. You can’t move into a community regulated by a contract, then complain when the contract applies to you. If you don’t like HOA rules applying to you, then don’t move into one. I can tell you, for a fact, that there are houses not a part of HOAs. Move there.
For example, I live in military base housing. We have limitations on grass height. It is 1/4 of an inch. I don’t think that it’s ‘fair’ that it is regulated, whether I’m there or not. But you know what? I signed the contract with the housing office, so I have to live by it. So if I’m gone on a temporary duty to another base, like I was just recently, I have my girlfriend mow it. It sucks that I have to do that, but it was in the contract. I didn’t have to live in base housing, I could have taken BAH and gotten an apartment or something. But I wanted a house, and I wanted a house where I wouldn’t be surrounded by other jerks who let their yard grow into the yard from Jumanji. So now I have to take my girlfriend to the Melting Pot every time I get home to reward her for mowing my yard so that I stay in compliance with a contract that I SIGNED.
Coldwater, I totally agree with you 100%. I wish that I had gotten into this thread earlier.
The topic of discussion is a little girl, whose grandparents intervened to care for her, rather than make her a ward of the state.
Would you prefer that your tax dollars pay for foster care?
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.