Contact
Subscribe


The First Freedom

May 27, 2009
By .
Law Practice

I worked like hell in high school, and got into a good college. I worked like hell in college and got into a good law school. I worked like hell for two of three years of law school, ensuring good opportunities thereafter. (I found it psychologically impossible to take law school seriously my third year. I paid the price. Bye bye, magna!)

Why work hard all that time? Well, money is part of it. I want to be comfortable and provide well for my family. Opportunity is part of it. I wanted to be able to work at exciting and rewarding jobs.

But most important of all, I wanted — and now have — the incalculably delicious freedom to say "fuck off."

There's no freedom greater than the right, and practical ability, to tell an asshole to take a hike, and then shoulder the consequences. Whether it's having the alternate opportunities and savings necessary to walk away from a job when your superior is a jackass, or the freedom I enjoy now to turn away clients who think that paying me means they can treat me like shit, that freedom allows us to define how we want to live our own lives and what what sort of nonsense we are prepared to accept from the people surrounding us. There have been few things more empowering then telling a client "you're fired" and seeing the client recognize that, yes, I can do that, because I have done the work and made the sacrifices necessary to put me in a position to do it.

But freedom requires responsibility. Life is full of opportunities to surrender freedom in exchange for something — good pay, prestige, living in a particular neighborhood. You've got to be ready to give those things up, or ready to refuse them in the first place when they are inescapable. I've never understood how people would think that living under the thumb of a homeowner's association was an acceptable trade for living in a particular neighborhood. Like this guy, you could play around at the edges by putting your inflatable rhinoceroses on the roof rather than on your lawn to escape the letter of HOA rules, but ultimately you're going to pay the price for having surrendered your freedom. Hey, if the house was worth that surrender, then fine. That's your choice. I make choices to surrender freedom when it is worth it as well — by having kids, for example. But think about it, for heaven's sake.

Last 5 posts by Ken

14 Comments
Tags

14 Comments

  1. Mike  •  May 27, 2009 @9:21 am

    I've actually been doing a lot of thought experiments with libertarianism and HOAs. HOAs are the ultimate libertarian construct. Voluntary parties. Private contracts. Perfect.

    Then you look at those fucking things!

    It's great to think about.

    No one (well, almost no one) likes his HOA. It's a life under petty rules and fines. Yet people entered into HOA contracts. Even though HOA rules can be amended, no one goes to meetings to do anything about it. No one fights for reform.

    It's just a great microcosm of democracy.

    I think one could spend the rest of his life thinking about nothing other than HOAs. There are so many angles to look at. Collective action problems, libertarianism, the psychology of oppression and the oppressors (who the fuck wants to be on an HOA board and why?). Great stuff.

  2. Patrick  •  May 27, 2009 @9:31 am

    I've found, through litigation, that the most obsessive control freaks gravitate to homeowners association boards. As Mike asks, what sort of person would want that job? A petty tyrant who cares if the neighbors own dogs that weigh above the prescribed limit, or that somewhere in the neighborhood, someone is flying an Ohio State flag on the day of the Michigan game.

    Fortunately when I searched for my house, I knew enough to demand of the realtor that it not be situated in such a neighborhood, and to see all restrictive covenants before making an offer.

  3. Patrick  •  May 27, 2009 @9:37 am

    And for those who are amused by such things, consider the 166 page rules and restrictive covenants that govern property ownership in Celebration, Florida, a community designed to appeal to people who want to live a life as close as possible to what they imagine it must be to live in Disney World, but for people who care about their freedom, the worst Hell in the United States.

    http://www.sandysellsflorida.com/celebration_florida/Community%20Charter.pdf

    Or consider that Seaside, Florida, the town that was presented as a New Urbanist Mind Control Hell in the film The Truman Show, is a real place.

  4. Grandy  •  May 27, 2009 @9:56 am

    Wow, I think I vacationed in Seaside with a friend and his family, once.

  5. Chris  •  May 27, 2009 @10:58 am

    My sister was dating an urban planner when the family had a get-together in Florida, and he dragged us all to Celebration. It's every bit as spooky as you would think.

  6. Windypundit  •  May 27, 2009 @11:02 am

    I live in a condominium, and the Condo Association is the exact same kind of nonsense. There, at least, you have to have an association because you own property in common. Still, they try to set up crazy rules about how many pets you can have, even though your condo is not common property.

    The problem is that property values are all about location, and the location of my house includes the neighbors' houses, and vice-versa. I.e. the location is our common property, so we can hurt each other's property values. This gives everybody a stake in everybody else's behavior, which leads to ugly things like HOAs and zoning boards. Then, once you have the legal structure for control, the control freaks go wild.

    Somehow, though, it works. Econometric studies strongly suggest that, other things being equal, homes with HOAs are worth more.

  7. Patrick  •  May 27, 2009 @11:19 am

    Windy, that depends on what one means by "works". I chose a nice house in a funky area of town, with no HOA, so that I could have the freedom to own three largeish dogs, fly my freak flag, or skip mowing the lawn on a holiday weekend in May when I really didn't feel like doing it.

    My property value may indeed be lower than it would be if I lived in a subdivision ruled by a HOA board member named Edna. Edna's happy with her high property appreciation (or was), while I'm happy with my dogs. I wouldn't allow my neighbors to tell me that I'd have to take the biggest dog to the shelter.

    Oddly, they seem to like the big dog well enough anyway. She's a gentle sweetheart.

  8. Dave (ND)  •  May 27, 2009 @11:21 am

    I've never really had a problem with any HoA that I've been around. I know that sometimes they suck, but quite frankly, I don't really want to live next to someone with a rhinocerous on their lawn.

    And Ken, you were just lucky. You didn't work hard.

  9. Charles  •  May 27, 2009 @11:33 am

    I really wish I had made fuck you money before I said 'fuck you,' but I'm glad I dropped out of the big firm life all the same. Sometimes you just have to jump before the net is in place.

  10. Mike  •  May 27, 2009 @11:55 am

    Re: home values.

    I've been meaning to discuss the slave morality mindset that leads people to live in less-than-ideal home situations because of the need to increase property values. Seems like a pretty fucking lame way to live. "Oh, can I do this to my home!? What will it do to resale value!?"

    Live where you fucking want to live. It's a fucking house, man.

    This obsession with property values and etc. is nonsense. Oh, and I opened an IRA when I was 20, so I understand the need to invest. People who go around talking about "real estate is the best investment" don't impress me.

    I'd rather work a few extra hours and put that money away into an IRA, and then come home to a house and neighborhood I actually want to fucking live in than have the booji obsession about "property values."

    No offense to anyone with that obsession. It's just not for me, and seems like a pitiful way to live.

    Truth is, I don't even care to OWN a house. Why have a mortgage that ties me to an employer or geographic location? Because it's the booji thing to do?

    Plus, where I live, a mortgage would be twice as much as my rent. I'd rather pay rent to live where I want to live, than to live somewhere I don't want to live as part of a middle-class wealth-increasing scam.

  11. jack fate  •  May 27, 2009 @4:18 pm

    That's why they are called PUDs (Planned Unit Developments) and that's why they seem to attract puds. Personally, I'd rather the puds live in a PUD. That way they won't live in my neighborhood.

  12. Windypundit  •  May 27, 2009 @5:48 pm

    Patrick, all I meant by "works" is that it raises property values. I can't imagine any other justification for a HOA.

    You value freedom, and Edna values a nice-looking, well-behaved neighborhood. So, given two identical houses, you would pay more for the one that gives you freedom, but people like Edna would pay more for a house in an HOA. If most people were like you, non-HOA houses would have higher prices because they are more valuable because of the freedom that comes with them. Studies seem to show, however, that HOA-encumbered housing higher priced, meaning that many people find a lot of value in a HOA.

    Or to put it another way, freedom lovers get their freedom at a good price.

  13. Patrick  •  May 28, 2009 @5:39 am

    Or to put it another way, freedom lovers get their freedom at a good price.

    Cheaper than eternal vigilance, or the blood of patriots.

  14. Jack  •  May 28, 2009 @8:06 pm

    I'm on my Condo Association board. Bow before me, and tremble.