The right to investment protection?

Does everyone have the right to build anything on their land and does the state have the right to ban it? Anything - like a mosque, or House in the shape of a penis in the historic city center?

Photo: FUTURE SYSTEMS Jan Kaplický
Photo: FUTURE SYSTEMS Jan Kaplický

Imagine you are buying House or an apartment in a beautiful, historic location. The price of that apartment is high and we can assume that it will be even higher in the future.

Of course - you really like the view from the apartment and its surroundings. That's why you're that House whether they bought an apartment.

In other words, you have done investment, the yield of which is the price of the apartment /house and the benefits you get from the view and the surroundings.

But then someone will build on the land across the street tall house in the shape of a penis.

You claim that man has no right to build something so ugly? That has no right to reduce the value of yours investment? That he should be built prohibited? In other words, you claim that you have the right to protect yours investment - for example, by law?

Logically, if I were to invest in stocks whose value would fall due to "bad speculators", I would also have the right to "protect investment“A state that should ban those speculative trades?

If I then invest in my education - and then find that the market situation has changed unexpectedly and my education is completely useless to me, that I have just wasted time and other resources, I have the right demand compensation from the state?

If I make a plan that doesn't work for me because of other people's planning, do I have the right to have the state ban other plans or compensate me for my possible failure?

Am I entitled to demand that the state compensate me - or generally forbid it - for any change in the situation to my detriment?

If so, the state has the right to ban or otherwise prevent it construction house in the shape of a penis in a historic area. If not, then everyone can obviously build on what they want.

0 comments

  1. Protection of the appearance of the historic center, protection of the air from exhalations, protection of the seas, rivers, climate, - in general the environment, regulation of television frequencies, všechno all this is generally the management of public goods. The liberal economy offers only a partial solution - it proposes to privatize them as much as possible, as the private owner manages them more efficiently than the public administrator. In many cases, such a situation can be imagined (sea, rivers, forests, radio frequencies, highways, private damage). for many reasons we do not want to) effectively distribute among people. And liberal economists don't get along well enough with them (as far as I know). So for now, it is necessary to manage them publicly, centrally and wait for some surprising technological invention, or something that would solve the unimaginable today dnes

  2. but on the other hand; when I imagine the medieval panorama of Prague and a huge phallus in the background, it completely refreshes the gyco atmosphere

  3. Of course, if I'm buying an apartment / house /…, then the current outlook has just come out and it's at my risk how I will believe it in the future. But there are ways to insure it. For example, I can enter into an agreement with the landlord. The landlord will also own land in the area and the tenants will have similar contracts. These will determine which buildings can be built where under what conditions (consent of the majority, consent of 3/4 of the owners, consent of all, approval by some - in the opinion of both parties - an independent authority,…)

  4. Vojta> Then you will understand that with Mr. Jandak! He has obviously shared with you the opinion that the "cultural heritage" cannot be "reduced" to capital, but will immediately tell you what the "right" cultural heritage is… 😉

  5. Investment protection and the protection of the historic area are two different things. I see cultural heritage and nature as something that cannot simply be reduced to capital.

Comments are off.