Friday, October 24, 2008

Should governments worry about a return of redlining? …

Foreclosure     Should law refocus its attention on the practice of “redlining” –- the practice of avoiding mortgage lending and other services because of race or location? 
   Some conservative chatter asserts that the housing and financial mess was generated in large part by the federal government’s encouraging lenders to make risky loans to poor families, including minority families. Certainly, it was recognized years ago that a large number of “subprime” loans were made to minority borrowers.  Today, many fear a backlash: that certain neighborhoods –- and certain categories of persons –- are becoming “off limits” for skittish and overly conservative lenders. 
   If there was ever an area that called for the application of the ideal of being colorblind and treating each person as an individual, not simply the member of a stereotypical “group,” this is it …

[Comments must be approved and thus take some time to appear online.]

October 24, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

A few cattle and a tax break …

   The recent fiancial disasters have made dubious many arguments about “trusting” the free market to made good choices for the nation.  But when government makes these choices, there is no guarantee that it will do better.  Government too may be susceptible to abuse.  Indeed, when government tries to shape behavior to the public good by land use law, it may often allow clever property owners to use the laws to their advantage.
Cow    Here’s a story from central Florida about a local government official and property owner, and a tax break designed to encourage “greenbelt” uses of land.  According to the story in the St. Petersburg Times, the property owner allowed 11 head of cattle (picture of generic cow at left) to graze on some land he had recently purchased, which entitled him a significant tax exemption on the land.  Within a few months after the exemption was granted this year, the property owner put one-third of the land up for sale as private residential construction.  According to the story, which speaks for itself, even a quick sale would not affect the tax exemption for any of this year.   
   Now this probably isn’t what the drafters of the agricultural land use tax exemption had in mind, was it?      
[Comments must be approved and thus take some time to appear online.]

October 21, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)