Jump to content
traditionally, intoxication has been regarded as problematic for society as well as for the individual.
the growing embrace of the culture of celebration of intoxication is having ramifications throughout society.
some of the concerns raised by this article warrant more detail. I am particularly concerned to learn that sex addiction can cause deterioration of the brain. As my new wife wishes to become pregnant, I have predictably participated to a degree that was quite different from the level I had to become accustom to with my late wife.
Am I putting my brain at risk by coupling so frequently?
At what point does participation in sexual activity constitute sex addiction? Obviously the compulsion to engage in sexual activity is as fundamental as that to survive, they are inextricably connected with living.
Unless someone can offer a better definition, I will assume that it is like the drinkers definition of an alcoholic. No matter how much or how often drink you're not an alcoholic unless it is destructive to your life or those of your loved ones.
The blight survey did not specify the condition that exists in the photographs. in a few cases it was obvious such as a close up of peeling paint on a downtown building, and others and obvious abrupt end of a sidewalk.
That to my mind was one of the major flaws of that professional survey, that it did not give more specific detail of the conditions it documented.
I had not heard that my house has been declared blighted by the City Council. That may be an assumption made because there was a picture of my property as an example of a location where one of the conditions described as blight exists.
That condition may very well be the fence along my property line which is leaning downhill due to the city road cut being left to steep for stability. if some of those funds could be used to shore up that road cut it would alleviate that particular "blight condition".
So here is a compromise solution. reduce the minimum term for unregulated rentals from 30 days to 2 weeks.
And while the particularly avaricious owners may bemoan the theoretical lost income potential, the reality is that many vacation rentals are occupied only 7 to 14 days a month anyway, as two or three day weekend based rentals are most common.
One will almost always have a better experience as a property owner with guests who stay for a period of weeks. For one thing, they will be cleaning up after themselves to a far greater degree than weekend guests.
There is a legal option currently available to those who wish to rent their homes to vacationers. It simply requires that the term of the contract not be less than 30 days. No special use or other permits are necessary.
At the rates vacation renters will pay, an occupancy of 7 to 14 days in a 30 day period is not a bad return on investment, and you have plenty of time to clean and prep for the next guest.
Interestingly, if you remain 30 days in Colorado you are considered to have taken residence and are required to change your drivers license and vehicle registration. But let's not start enforcing that one, then all those seasonal people would also be eligible to vote!
But now that I've broached the subject of selective enforcement, can we please discard the blatantly discriminatory policy of complaint based enforcement, and simply repeal laws we are not willing to enforce consistently? Applicable at all levels of government!
Sadly it is true, the interpretations have too often given the government far more authority that most reasonable people would have agreed was appropriate.
This is what the founders (and leaders of every generation since) warned about. Any government, by its very nature, will tend to seek greater powers, and since it has substantial power to begin with, it will generally be successful in that effort. During the ratification debates, and especially in the Federalist, the case was often made that the Constitution would be effective in helping to curb this tendency. However it was also emphasized that a vigilant electorate, promptly removing from office those who would expand the powers of government, would also be essential to successful limitation.
In fact the expansions of government power were usually asked for by the voters or lobbyists. In nearly every instance it was for some worthy cause to benefit the people, canals and railroads, trust busting, relief from economic and natural disasters, protection of the environment. Many great purposes were thus advanced, bot all to often the enormous power given was abused, and it was almost never rescinded.
Few will disagree that it now has reached a point far beyond any reasonable measure, although most will favor retaining broad authority in some specific areas that conform with their personal political philosophy while calling for reductions on other areas.
It is so far gone now, as courts and executive actions have become the most active in reassigning authority, that is is unlikely to be brought back into balance by simply electing differently oriented representatives. A constitutional crisis is ongoing, and may well be only solvable, if at all, by a constitutional convention that determinedly reverses the excessive accumulation of powers.
Such a convention is described in article V of the Constitution, and many states (37 last I remember) have now officially entered the debate of whether to convene this convention. If it does advance, and actually attempt to take powers away from the federal government, it will be the most significant such event since Washington declined to keep the Presidency for life.
More information on this fascinating possibility is at http://www.conventionofstates.com/
OK, just the lines then.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Last login: Saturday, November 26, 2016
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2016 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.
Tablet version |