Our shrinking rights and the fight in Oriental NC

[boatman61]

Damn... and there was I thinking Capitalism was the exploitation of the many by the privileged few... grabbing as much as possible and giving as little as possible...
And the difference between Communism and Democracy...?
You get a chance to change the thieves every few years...

[Captain Bill]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

Actually there is a NC homestead exemption. Well they call it an homestead exclusion, but its the same thing. Only for folks 65 and older and the disabled. So GVH might be able to apply for it if he's a disabled vet. Only good for the first $25k or 50% of the value which ever it less.

But agree that there should be a bit more smarts in the collection of taxes so money collected creates a positive income to the states.

I may be mistaken, but I think that applies only to real estate taxes, not personal property taxes. Boats are personal property, not real estate.

[Custom30]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

It's also called "majority rule", and is the inspiration for democracy.

Which is why we have a Republic, not a Democracy, to prevent exactly this type of "majority rule" at the expense of a minority.


'

[captain58sailin]

Back in the day, before town counsels, etc... There was a village, and the village had a Chief, usually born into the position, sometimes he had to kill the previous Chief for his position or the previous Chief voluntarily retired or died. Now if an outsider were to come into the village's area, they would seek an audience with the Chief, and the terms of their stay would be settled upon. Now if the outsiders sought to assimilate into the village and had brought needed skills or items of value , they would be welcomed as a member of the village, and terms for that assimilation would be determined by the Chief for the good of the village. Now if an outsider overstayed their time, then the villagers would complain to the Chief and he would have a quiet word with the persons in question and they would be asked to move on. If the persons of interest ignored this subtle hint, they would be driven out by what ever means available.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by boatman61

Will that be in every 30 days... or 12 months...

Unfortuantely because of a few bad apples, they will have to make an official determination rather than people using common sense.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

I read through the TownDock letters to the editor, I would regard many of them as racist and inflammatory, especially towards prima donna. The basic tenant was the french are vagrants and we don't like vagrants spoiling our view etc etc.

It would seem no one sat down with these cruises/liveaboards and actually discussed the issues and sought a compromise or a resolution. Seemingly its easier to throw stones from afar. I do not see well meaning charity as "talking" to them.


The lack of rules always leads to situations like this. Thats why unfortunately we have them

the basic tenant of the capitalistic system is within the law i can hog resources to my hearts content. i can acquire more land , build bigger houses, etc irrespective of whether its fair or reasonable or even "decent". the cruisers are within the law.

i suspect if it was a big rich yacht ( if it could fit) spending lots of money, you wouldn't see letters to TownDock.

All I see is bullying.



nothing wrong with that at all. it would seem it need some regulation and thought as to the intended use of the anchorage.


"wrong" is a moral judgement , best left to the church pulpit and angels on a pin debates.




there is a bus lane where i live , its frequently empty, yet i am excluded ( for very long periods) , according to you , i should be entitled to my "fair share".

Sorry , lack of appropriate local ordinances, lies behind the root of this issue. bellyaching is just that . if you want to control it, then control it with the application of just law.

What was attempted however was simple plain intimidation.

If you want to say we should live without morals, then we must agree to disagree. Morals are the basis of civilization and the foundation of law.

You bus lane example doesn't hold up. As I said, when the rights of differing groups come into conflict, they must be balanced. I guarantee, before the bus lanes were set up, there were extensive analysis likely with public meetings and a wide variety of stakeholders were considered. It may not seem like it but those empty bus lanes are probably improving your commute.

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by Custom30

Which is why we have a Republic, not a Democracy, to prevent exactly this type of "majority rule" at the expense of a minority.


'

I LOVE when someone tries to use a formal definition to 'prove' that the informal use of a word isn't correct.

Yes, a Republic isn't a pure democracy, but it is a form of democracy nonetheless. Majority rule is also the case in a representational form of government, as long as constitutional rights aren't violated.

Most of us know right from wrong. When someone imposes on the public, they usually end up being told to "move along", even if it takes a while. In this case, good sense on the part of a few individuals could obviate the need for more laws.

In fact, the rationale for government at all is the need for common defense, common infrastructure, and to both protect a few individuals as well as keep them in line with public responsibility. The door swings both ways.

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by captain58sailin

Back in the day, before town counsels, etc... There was a village, and the village had a Chief, usually born into the position, sometimes he had to kill the previous Chief for his position or the previous Chief voluntarily retired or died. Now if an outsider were to come into the village's area, they would seek an audience with the Chief, and the terms of their stay would be settled upon. Now if the outsiders sought to assimilate into the village and had brought needed skills or items of value , they would be welcomed as a member of the village, and terms for that assimilation would be determined by the Chief for the good of the village. Now if an outsider overstayed their time, then the villagers would complain to the Chief and he would have a quiet word with the persons in question and they would be asked to move on. If the persons of interest ignored this subtle hint, they would be driven out by what ever means available.

Well said.

[familycruisers]

Originally Posted by Delancy

What a joke! I finally read the bile on Towndock.

The Town of Oriental gave up the anchorage for a for-profit-marina and now folks complain there is no room for transients to anchor? Shouldn't transients be staying at the fancy marina? What a bunch of idiots.

Good luck with construction of the new Walmart the town approved. Guess they never heard of a thing called "globalization" which just kills me when a French boat in their midst, sponging off local do-gooders and stealing, is causing them to get their panties all in a bundle.

Pretty much the way we see it.

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Im not arguing for lenient action. Im not arguing for "fair". ( because in history "fair" is determined by the victors).

You either deal with this by rule of law , a law that acts impartially on all. or you put up and shut up. I mean you think the US is "fair", I would call it many things but not "fair" ( and many other societies too BTW).

Seeking some sort of common decency or so called "fairness" is entirely biased, It was once "fair" to deny certain sections of the population the vote, it was once "fair" to lock up certain consenting adults, it was once "fair" for the Anglican church to deny certain "pilgrims" their religious freedoms….etc , ad nauseum. thats why we instated a state of law, to set forth a reasonable set of limits to whats "fair"

dave

I agree. And things change and laws change. I wonder what will happen here?

Too many people and not enough water..............and I want to join them/you

[sailorchic34]

Originally Posted by Captain Bill

I may be mistaken, but I think that applies only to real estate taxes, not personal property taxes. Boats are personal property, not real estate.

Well most places it applies to homes, RV's, mobile homes and even boats, IF it is your sole place to live. I have not checked NC law, but Federal law says a boat is or can be a home for various tax purposes.

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

Well most places it applies to homes, RV's, mobile homes and even boats, IF it is your sole place to live. I have not checked NC law, but Federal law says a boat is or can be a home for various tax purposes.

It can be considered a residence for the deduction of interest on Federal tax returns, but since boats aren't taxed as real estate, the homestead exemption doesn't really apply here.

People who pay real estate taxes support local schools. Personal property tax applies in some localities, as do registration fees.

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

Just because someone is richer then another does not mean that they are more deserving of an anchoring location.

There have always been anchor outs and most likely there always will be. They come they go. For the most part they are not hurting anything. Except for some folks self rightest indignation that is.

I agree with the first sentence.

The second paragraph, however, doesn't seem to apply in this case. Since there are six slips, and three-four are taken up by longer term visitors, it actually does hurt something -- the ability of other cruisers to visit.

I don't see how this is any different than an RV coming and parking in front of your house. Most people don't like it, and it's illegal most places. So it might be more practical than "self righteous indignation"

[MarkSF]

Originally Posted by Custom30

Which is why we have a Republic, not a Democracy, to prevent exactly this type of "majority rule" at the expense of a minority.


'

From the Wikipedia definition of Republic : (I added the bold)

"A republic is literally a form of government in which affairs of state are a "public matter" (Latin: res publica), not the private concern of the rulers, in which public offices are subsequently appointed or elected rather than privately accommodated, i.e. through inheritance or divine mandate. In modern times, the common definition of a republic is a government which excludes a monarch."

So the two modern forms of democracy are the republic, and the constitutional monarchy.

Neither prevent or assist the tyranny of the majority, which is what the founding fathers were worried about - checks and balances do that. For example, the supreme court has the power to veto any legislation. The constitution also makes sure that any legislation must be subject to enormous debate before passing.

The house and the senate are elected for different terms to help prevent legislation passing on a wave of popular opinion.

The checks and balances cause frustration when it seems that congress can't make a decision in a timely manner, but this was by deliberate design.

The British system prevents the tyranny of the majority by having a non-elected second house, and then indeed the queen can veto any legislation, in theory at least.

[sailorchic34]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

It can be considered a residence for the deduction of interest on Federal tax returns, but since boats aren't taxed as real estate, the homestead exemption doesn't really apply here.

People who pay real estate taxes support local schools. Personal property tax applies in some localities, as do registration fees.

Honey, I have a homestead exemption on my boat. The homestead exemption does apply to RV's and boats if that is your home. Least it does in most states.