If a drop of rain falls on your property, who owns it?
Who owns rain?
That's not the setup for a joke but is a serious question. Cuz guess what, sparky: According to government, rain is owned by...the government.
"Wait," I hear you saying: "If an inch of rain falls on my lawn, how the fuck does any government--at any level--have any rational claim to it?"
And the answer is...often it isn't rational, but they're making the claim anyway. And since they have infinite money to hire attorneys, if you take 'em to court you'll likely end up broke.
One of the arguments being made by the feds is via the EPA and Corps of Engineers: Those two agencies are charged with oversight of drinkable water and navigable waters, respectively, so the feds use that to argue that because in theory all water eventually winds up in rivers, and is potentially drinkable, the feds have control over every single drop that falls.
They've used this outrageous but predictable stretch of what should have been an obvious term of law to claim that some farmer who has a dry creek that floods once a year will be breaking the law if he levels the thing out so he can till it more efficiently. Or that the EPA can sue and fine a homeowner on 80 acres who builds a livestock pond without getting their permission.
States aren't any better. Homeowners who have installed systems to catch rainwater for home use have been sued by states for illegally capturing the property of the State. No, I'm not joking.
This should outrage every American. But for some reason it doesn't bother Democrats/statists/"progs."
I'm pretty sure the Founders wouldn't recognize the present-day U.S.
That's not the setup for a joke but is a serious question. Cuz guess what, sparky: According to government, rain is owned by...the government.
"Wait," I hear you saying: "If an inch of rain falls on my lawn, how the fuck does any government--at any level--have any rational claim to it?"
And the answer is...often it isn't rational, but they're making the claim anyway. And since they have infinite money to hire attorneys, if you take 'em to court you'll likely end up broke.
One of the arguments being made by the feds is via the EPA and Corps of Engineers: Those two agencies are charged with oversight of drinkable water and navigable waters, respectively, so the feds use that to argue that because in theory all water eventually winds up in rivers, and is potentially drinkable, the feds have control over every single drop that falls.
They've used this outrageous but predictable stretch of what should have been an obvious term of law to claim that some farmer who has a dry creek that floods once a year will be breaking the law if he levels the thing out so he can till it more efficiently. Or that the EPA can sue and fine a homeowner on 80 acres who builds a livestock pond without getting their permission.
States aren't any better. Homeowners who have installed systems to catch rainwater for home use have been sued by states for illegally capturing the property of the State. No, I'm not joking.
This should outrage every American. But for some reason it doesn't bother Democrats/statists/"progs."
I'm pretty sure the Founders wouldn't recognize the present-day U.S.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home