Building Permits or
"Buying permission from the government to work on your own private property".

A property Rights Infringement

The broken system

In an effort to protect buyers from buying homes, buildings, etc. that might be faulty or even dangerous, the government has come up with a system of standardizing the way that buildings will be built called "building codes". Many who run for office claiming to be proponents of a free enterprise are also proponents of this system of government control of the improvement of private property.

The problem that these fakes face in the coming political environment is many of today's society are starting to look at politics a bit more closely than they have in recent decades. With the ever growing interference of government into personal life and business, people are growing less tolerant of government intrusion.

Before we get into how a truly free market would handle something like building codes, let us actually look into what this system is. For starters it is the utter and complete confiscation of real property. The fact is when one has to get permission from someone else to work on the house in which he lives or the property which he owns and, in addition, pay annual monetary fees to that organization from which he needs to get permission to work on said property, he is answering to a landlord. Ask anybody who rents a home from a landlord what kind of relationship he has with his landlord and one will see that there is very little difference. As a matter of fact, just stop paying the annual fee for a short time and see just how long it takes to get evicted by the landlord of the home that you supposedly purchased.

There are two primary reasons for this system that are not openly advocated by most politicians and government employees who work in this system. The most obvious, of course, is more control of "we the people". Any government's ultimate goal is to gain total control of the people over which they govern.

The second reason, less obvious to most people, is the system of buying permission from the government puts into place a system that keeps the government informed as to the improvements made to real property. Improvements made to real property typically increase the value of said property, thus increasing the amount of required annual fee known as property tax on said property.

Of course, another problem with this system is that market increases also increase the value of the property thus increasing the amount of the annual fee without making improvements to the property. This puts sufficient burden on many people with fixed incomes that they are forced to sell their properties for lack of being able to keep up with the landlord's (the government) annual fee.

The people who are most at risk to this are senior citizens. Of course, the government of many counties claim to have senior exemptions to relieve seniors of paying all that they normally would have to pay. This does only apply to those who make less than what the government determines to be an acceptable amount to give them their deduction. So a senior who makes less than the government's set rate of income who does not have a mortgage payment can actually make out better than a senior who makes one dollar more than the permissible amount and has a mortgage payment. This is also age discrimination.

Exceptions with a payoff...

The most humorous joke of all with this system is the way that individuals can get around zoning laws or building codes. There is in existence what is known as "conditional use permits" and "variances". Conditional use basically means that one can apply to use a particular property for a function that it normally would not be permitted to be used, an RV park for example. A "variance" is applying to the government to have them allow one to make an exception to a building code. One might want to build a garage next to the house and the building code will not permit it, because the building setback from the property line does not leave enough room for the garage to fit. So the owner can apply for a variance to get permission to build the garage anyway. So with a simple payoff to the government one can get permission to do what nobody else is permitted to do without making a similar payoff. Notice that many things that the government is permitted to do would send anybody else to prison. The government does not like it when someone else treads on it's territory.

Basically, if you own real property, why should you have to pay off the government before you can make improvements to your property???

The free market way...

In a free market people would get to choose for themselves what kinds of protection he or she is willing to pay for and would accept the responsibility for his or her choices. Most adults do not like to be treated as though they are inept children who have to be cared for by the government, yet our politicians continue to increase the amount of "care" that we are forced to accept even at our own protesting.

Almost everybody who has worked in the real estate industry, whether it be real estate sales or construction, has heard of an organization called the Master Builders' Association. This organization works to increase building ethics and standards in the industry and has chapters not only in every state in the US, but has chapters in many other countries around the world. It exists in spite of the "protection" that our politicians provide.

It would be a simple matter for the Master Builders' Association, or MBA as it is sometimes called, to maintain its own set of building codes within the industry. The MBA could then hire inspectors who would inspect homes as they were being built. When builders were building homes, they could choose to build MBA certified homes or not. Of course there would be added expenses for having a home inspected as it were being built and that cost would be passed on to the consumer, much like it is today when the government is paid to inspect and time is wasted on the return of profit waiting for government inspectors to get time to perform their duties. Now I'm not saying that inspectors are not busy. Indeed, when one has the government granting one's organization a monopoly on home inspection, of course, that organization will be kept extremely busy.

People would then have the free choice to pay the extra money to buy an MBA Certified Home or pay a lessor amount and accept the risks associated with buying an uncertified home. In a free market, the MBA would even have competition and some organizations' certifications might even be more desirable than others' depending on the strictness of the code that is used in building. Anytime that there is a need in the market place, someone will be willing to fulfill that need for a price. With competition of the market, those services will be presented for a lower price and better service. That's just Economics 101.

There is still a price associated with having the government fulfill a market need and the price is usually greater since the government not only charges a fee, but also takes away freedom of choice and puts the consumer at the whim of the particular inspector. Everybody has heard about someone who was trying for over six months to get a "permit" from the government and a builder gets approved for an entire subdivision in less than two. This, of course, is another fallacy of having the government force these laws on consumers. Money talks. If you have it, you get what you want, if you don't, you will wait in line.

In a free society we would also have a free market. When you are taking a look at your representatives to see whom you will vote for in the next election, ask the tough questions and find out how they stand on free market issues. Every time the government gets involved with how we do business, it costs you money and freedom. Until we stop voting for the same people year after year, it will not change. You can make a difference. Vote for who you think can do the best job for your beliefs, not just who might be the lessor of two evils.

In a free society, if it is illegal for private citizens or companies to do, it is also illegal for the government to do. That is as it should be.

Defend Freedom™