If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Boston.com)   Blogger is incredulous that his neighbor has the right to cut down a tree, on the neighbor's own property, so he goes whining to the city. Not surprisingly, quite a few people have a problem with his point of view   (boston.com) divider line 83
    More: Asinine, public property, nearest neighbor search, private property  
•       •       •

17521 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Jan 2014 at 12:10 AM (27 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-01-20 10:49:31 PM
27 votes:
And if you read to the very end, you learn that he's a renter.  He has no investment it the neighborhood.  He's just another entitled little shiat who thinks the world exists to suit him.

What an asshole.
2014-01-20 10:41:53 PM
18 votes:
Is it crazy or un-American to suggest that, at a certain point, a tree is no longer one person's private property per se, and belongs to the community?

Yes.
2014-01-20 11:00:07 PM
16 votes:

Lsherm: We had a beautiful tree in the middle of our driveway circle, and it dropped a farking branch on my car the size of a medium sized tree.  I cut that farker down the next day.  It took a farking year to get rid of the stump, but we have a nice longleaf pine there now.

Trees need to be cut down for all kinds of reasons.  If his neighbor needs a shed, then his neighbor needs a shed.  It's not Patrick Smith's place to decide what other people do with trees on their property.  He's free to plant trees in his own yard if he wants.


Actually, he's not.  You see, he's a renter.  He'd have to ask permission of the person who owns the property.  But he seems to think his rent includes voting rights on the disposition of his neighbors' private property, because he can see their trees and likes them.  It's typical toddler reasoning - If I can see it, it's mine.

Entitled little shiat.
2014-01-20 11:42:49 PM
15 votes:
If you don't like what someone is doing with their property, you should buy their property.

If you can't afford to buy their property, you should move.

If you can't or don't want to move, you should shut the fark up.
2014-01-21 12:06:44 AM
11 votes:
Don't let this man join the board of an HOA.
2014-01-20 10:27:29 PM
11 votes:
One of the commenters had it exactly right. I don't like when trees are cut down either but to quote: "If you don't like what your neighbors are doing with their trees, move."

If you want to get into a philosophical discussion about the nature of property ownership, take things back to when the land was in its pristine state before anyone owned it and those trees were most likely not even there.

Flip the whole thing around and suppose you wanted nice shade for your driveway but the only place to plant a tree would be on a neighbor's property. They have no obligation to do so, no matter how nice it would be for the "community".
2014-01-20 10:49:48 PM
10 votes:
Stopped reading at "my landlord".
2014-01-20 11:43:16 PM
8 votes:

mikeray: Hell the way it is trending in this country he will be able to marry his neighbors tree soon.


We had a good thread going.  And then you decided to post.
2014-01-20 11:23:14 PM
8 votes:
Follow-up note from the author:
Comments to this story seem to be harping on the fact that I'm a renter and not an owner; that neither property involved in this story belongs to me. I fail to see how or why that matters in the greater context of my argument. It feels to me like a loophole-ish way of invalidating my points. - PS


Stop typing, jackass. Maybe it sucks that the trees were cut down, but beyond saying as much, it's not your call as to what does or doesn't happen to them.
2014-01-20 10:55:32 PM
7 votes:
We had a beautiful tree in the middle of our driveway circle, and it dropped a farking branch on my car the size of a medium sized tree.  I cut that farker down the next day.  It took a farking year to get rid of the stump, but we have a nice longleaf pine there now.

Trees need to be cut down for all kinds of reasons.  If his neighbor needs a shed, then his neighbor needs a shed.  It's not Patrick Smith's place to decide what other people do with trees on their property.  He's free to plant trees in his own yard if he wants.
2014-01-21 12:27:07 AM
6 votes:
...it did the whole neighborhood a service by concealing the front facade of the guy's house, which -- there's no polite way of putting this -- is one of the ugliest and tackiest house on the block. I do not find aesthetically pleasing.

Interesting. I found a polite way of putting it.
2014-01-21 12:49:36 AM
5 votes:
As left-leaning as I am... Jesus farking Christ, dude.  Find something more important to whinge about.
2014-01-21 12:13:31 AM
5 votes:
I guarandamntee you this guy is a lifelong liberal
2014-01-21 12:01:03 AM
5 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: I really like large trees.  One of the reasons I bought the house I did was because it has a couple huge oaks on it.

The one in the rear is on my property, but just barely.  When a new family moved into the house whose property borders it and started removing a lot of the vegetation, I was worried they might think the tree was theirs and try to do something to it.  I thought about going over, but 'Welcome to the neighborhood - don't touch my tree' didn't sound neighborly in my head.

Thankfully they didn't mess with it, but I still feel I need to do something to mark it as mine to keep something from happening to it in the future, especially since it stands outside of my fence (which was there before I moved in).

I'm thinking about putting up a decorative stone circle and some mulch around the base so that they realize I have a claim to it.


You could do what I did - just go over, introduce yourself and welcome them, and say, "I love what you're doig with the yard!  Oh - by the way - that big tree over there looks like it's over the line, but you don't have to take care of it.  It's on my property.  I'd appreciate it, though, if you didn't prune it before asking me - I'm rather partial to it."  Or some such.  I actually got permission from my neighbor to cut down a small tree in his yard that he wasn't maintaining and that blocked my view.
2014-01-20 11:27:04 PM
5 votes:
I really like large trees.  One of the reasons I bought the house I did was because it has a couple huge oaks on it.

The one in the rear is on my property, but just barely.  When a new family moved into the house whose property borders it and started removing a lot of the vegetation, I was worried they might think the tree was theirs and try to do something to it.  I thought about going over, but 'Welcome to the neighborhood - don't touch my tree' didn't sound neighborly in my head.

Thankfully they didn't mess with it, but I still feel I need to do something to mark it as mine to keep something from happening to it in the future, especially since it stands outside of my fence (which was there before I moved in).

I'm thinking about putting up a decorative stone circle and some mulch around the base so that they realize I have a claim to it.
2014-01-20 11:17:37 PM
5 votes:

So. This is my town. I've lived here since 2002, and bought a postage stamp condo in the "gentrifying" section of town in August.



Somerville, MA is the most densely populated city in New England. We invented Fluff and the necco waver. The first American Flag was flown in Somerville. We have the oldest co-ed public high school in the US.

It's not all good. Somerville is a weird place, going through a bit of an identity crisis. Whitey Bulger, a gangster, killed a bunch of people in my new "gentrifying" neighborhood, and the income disparity is off the charts. DINKS like us can afford to spend several hundred thousand dollars on 700sq feet, but we still have a very high free and reduced lunch* program in the public schools. What was once a very blue collar, working class town has turned partly into a very, very hip, expensive, young area.

The neighborhood this douche lives in - Davis Sq- has some of the highest rents in Massachusetts- and they live side by side with people who have owned their house for generations, and are confused with by the boutique humus shop and all the farking froyo joints.

Anyway, I just want to say that while Davis Sq can be more insufferable than Berkeley, I love this town. This guy? He's a dick. But very very soon, he will meet some pretentious young girl, they'll buy a Bernese Mountain Dog, scrape the Elizabeth Warren sticker off the Prius and move to the a planned community in Hingham.

And good riddance.

*organic, high protein low gluten lunches. Some of the best in the country.
2014-01-21 01:02:14 AM
4 votes:

bikkurikun: But then again I am living in Europe where indeed there are laws against these kind of things; you can't just cut down trees on your land unless there is a valid reason for it, just as you can't built what you want if other people have to look at it too, and you can't alter historical buildings without permission. I think those perfectly sane rules aimed at preserving the community in the long term as that it is deemed far more important than the individual needs, whether you own the property or not.


And that is why you guys suck I don't care what the liberals keep trying to shove down our throats. The European Union is a joke and every damn country except Germany is a mess. You don't take away propertry rights without a good reason and have freedom. They aren't compatible.
2014-01-21 12:34:05 AM
4 votes:

stirfrybry: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: I guarandamntee you this guy is a lifelong liberal

Dyed in the wool


Yeah, because conservatives have never, ever tried to tell other people what they can and can't do.
2014-01-21 12:31:54 AM
4 votes:
Idiot new neighbors cut down a healthy (and gorgeous) willow and do it yourself *paved* their backyard.
Cost me $200 to install a berm to stop their new 'yard' from flooding my already wet yard. Another 200 for a higher back fence because they pointed their damn light at my house and asking politely had no result.
New berms on their other neighbors' lawns has given them a nice swimming pool when it rains...and as of this fall the willow's popping back up for a third time.

Punchline: Asked local landscape company what they could do about their flooding yard without spending a lot...his answer was "Tear up the concrete and plant a thirsty tree, maybe a willow."

This article guy, this guy is a douche. If their removal of the tree had an effect on the neighboring properties other than 'look,' he'd have a legitimate point of view. Maybe.
2014-01-21 12:21:38 AM
4 votes:

Three Crooked Squirrels: Keep in mind when bashing HOAs: This is why some people like HOAs.


Yep. I hate HOAs and the people who like them.
2014-01-20 11:23:32 PM
4 votes:
(And keep in mind the closeness of properties here in Somerville -- the most densely populated city in America. Maybe, if you're in the suburbs or further from the city, you can't quite relate to this debate, but for some of us urbanites, even a single tree makes a gigantic difference in the way a property looks and feels.)


Right. So here is where I lose my farking mind. The most densely populated city in America???? urbanites?? A single tree?? You're not in Cabrini Green you farking twat, you're on a tree lined street a few blocks from the center of town. There's a bike path two blocks from your house. You live half a mile from Elizabeth Warren.

I hope you get eaten by a bear.
2014-01-20 11:14:27 PM
4 votes:
"I wouldn't sue" - PS

Complete and udder bullshiat. The first thing this douche would do is sue the neighbor if the tree fell over and crushed his car and state that the tree was dangerous and should've been cut down long ago.

/His sense of entitlement makes him soound like he's a cocksucking renter douchebag.
2014-01-21 01:25:17 AM
3 votes:
Did anyone else read to "I'm known to vacation in tropical rain forests"?

That line ticked me off for a number of reasons.
2014-01-21 01:18:15 AM
3 votes:

bikkurikun: Benevolent Misanthrope: And if you read to the very end, you learn that he's a renter.  He has no investment it the neighborhood.  He's just another entitled little shiat who thinks the world exists to suit him.

What an asshole.


A renter has no investment in the neighbourhood? WTF does property ownership have to do with investment in the neighbourhood? If he invests his time in trying to make the neighbourhood better he invests in it. A renter who spends time volunteering or being politically active has far more investment in a neighbourhood than someone who owns property but doesn't give a fark. Whether he is right or wrong, he obviously cares for how the neighbourhood is looking, so he invests in it.

I don't get the property ownership fetish. Even if you own property, unless you are in the middle of nowhere, you still live in a community and the long terms needs of the community are more important than the individual short-term whims of a property owner.

But then again I am living in Europe where indeed there are laws against these kind of things; you can't just cut down trees on your land unless there is a valid reason for it, just as you can't built what you want if other people have to look at it too, and you can't alter historical buildings without permission. I think those perfectly sane rules aimed at preserving the community in the long term as that it is deemed far more important than the individual needs, whether you own the property or not.


While we appreciate your input, here in America they tried your way and nearly everybody starved to death.  Since about 1611, we're a little more keen on private property than you old worlders.
2014-01-21 01:02:41 AM
3 votes:

Lsherm: He actually had a good column on Salon for years:  "Ask the Pilot."  But he would occasionally stray into political discussions and they always ended up like this.  He's a good pilot and a good writer when he's talking about planes, but he has some moonbat theories when he strays out of his comfort area.


Actually, there were times even in his comfort area where he's a farking jag.  One I recall specifically about the six hour wait limit passed by congress. He wrote this long column decrying how unfair it was to take that decision away from the airlines.  Worse, after 100 people in comments explained to him just how horrible sitting in an airplane for hour after hour is, he was all "no, you all don't get it".  And the comments were like "no, YOU don't get it!".  And he replied again and again in condescending ways.   It was one of those shameful displays where you wish an editor would have jumped in and stopped the madness.

So this column surprises me not.  Douchebags gonna douche.
kab
2014-01-21 12:22:48 AM
3 votes:
Blogger hasn't wrapped his head around the notion that here in the ever-righteous US, you only get to infringe on your neighbors efforts when they want to build something, rather than when they want to remove it.

Want to chop down trees?   Well it's your property!

Want to build a deck?  Well.. just a minute...you need permission for that!  What, do you think that's your property?
2014-01-21 12:10:21 AM
3 votes:
Keep in mind when bashing HOAs: This is why some people like HOAs.
2014-01-20 11:43:12 PM
3 votes:

what_now: We invented Fluff and the necco waver.


Yuck.
2014-01-20 11:41:58 PM
3 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: but I still feel I need to do something to mark it as mine to keep something from happening to it in the future,


How about a low stone wall?

www.ecorazzi.com
2014-01-20 11:28:41 PM
3 votes:
I know I got pissed when my one neighbors got the church that shares our back property lines to cut down some trees, especially since this year the wind knocked down part of the fence, plus more noise, and not just on Sundays, but this is ridiculous.

At least we got the wood, and a hell of a lot of wood chips for the urban garden from the guy doing the tree cutting.  You deal with it, and move on.
2014-01-21 08:07:17 AM
2 votes:

kab: Blogger hasn't wrapped his head around the notion that here in the ever-righteous US, you only get to infringe on your neighbors efforts when they want to build something, rather than when they want to remove it.

Want to chop down trees?   Well it's your property!

Want to build a deck?  Well.. just a minute...you need permission for that!  What, do you think that's your property?


Oh, please.  You can get permission to build a deck here pretty much automatically so long as you a) keep it on your side of the property line, and b) build it out of something more substantial than rotten 1x3 propped up on the lawn, so it doesn't collapse and kill the twelve neighbors you invited over.

Somerville's got a lot of three-deckers, and if a third floor deck collapses, you're lucky if you're only going to the hospital.

You didn't USED to need permission, but enough idiots over the decades violated a) and/or b) that new regs got passed.

Basically, it's your dad's fault.  You know, the guy with all the tools who thought that owning them meant he could build anything.
2014-01-21 06:28:21 AM
2 votes:

shtychkn: Guys like this gives liberals a bad name.

He isn't a liberal, liberals are pro-economic regulation and anti-social regulation.

This guy is a totalitarian.  Pro-Economic and Pro-Social regulation.


This.  That is the problem with a simplistic either/or view, political views are a multidimensional spectrum and the simple mind lumps "i agin' it" with "them".

Then political parties align themselves with the popular "i agin' its", so you get strange bedfellows like political parties that are pro- gun freedom but anti- marriage freedom, which is absurd.
2014-01-21 05:46:44 AM
2 votes:
Oh god, and he's just renting the place atop of that....wow...I don't think I've ever had a legitimate use for this phrase until right now:  "Check your farking privilege."
2014-01-21 01:52:27 AM
2 votes:
Guys like this gives liberals a bad name.

He isn't a liberal, liberals are pro-economic regulation and anti-social regulation.

This guy is a totalitarian.  Pro-Economic and Pro-Social regulation.
2014-01-21 01:38:03 AM
2 votes:

mikaloyd: bikkurikun: No, it is the other way around. Freedom is for everyone, not just people rich enough to own property. Property ownership at most is for the duration of an individual's lifespan, and usually takes shorter as people sell and move. The community outlives the individual, and hence the needs of the community/society outweigh the needs of the individual regardless of what he owns. And you don't take away property rights, you limit them. Again because no one lives, and therefore owns property, until eternity.

Trees also are not immortal or permanent.


www.destination360.com
No, but they come closer than we have...


/blogger is a douche, so are people who think that 'owning' a house means they can do whatever they want on the property
//9/10ths of you, I'm sure a bank actually owns whatever you are claiming is 'yours'
///renter
2014-01-21 01:24:03 AM
2 votes:
You all are a feeling-less bunch.
I've had this happen to me.
You all have no idea what it is like, waking up in the morning, calmly, almost zen-fully and definitely ritualistically prepare your organic soy latte, carry the cup you crafted by hand yourself out to your back yard....only to find that this ancient creature you used to carry on wordless conversations with every morning murdered by your neighbor.
Who cares about arbitrary lines drawn in the municipality?!
It was a living creature!

You were not there the night I gathered my friends and we had a candlelight vigil in remembrance of that mighty oak. You did not hear the sobbing.

Even at the risk of getting arrested, many times I have considered jumping over the 'fence' and placing a small monument for my fallen friend.

So before you judge this person in haste, try to imagine what kind of relation he had with the tree. What kind of conversations they had every morning. How long he mourned.

Forgive me. I have to stop typing and make another soy latte to steady my nerves.
AND I'm trying to cut down on caffeine.

/I keed. I KEED.
2014-01-21 01:23:59 AM
2 votes:

kab: Blogger hasn't wrapped his head around the notion that here in the ever-righteous US, you only get to infringe on your neighbors efforts when they want to build something, rather than when they want to remove it.

Want to chop down trees?   Well it's your property!

Want to build a deck?  Well.. just a minute...you need permission for that!  What, do you think that's your property?


You can't remove soil from your property if it will significantly impact the draineag pattern of adjoining properties without a variance in most communities. In fact trees could be similar, my parents hadn't had any flooding in their basement in over 20 years of owning their house (including when Hugo turned the street into a river that we paddled down) until the neighbor cut down a pine on the property line and suddenly there was 3x as much rain trapped between the houses. We didn't take it up with the city but we did ask that they go in halfs with us on a replacement mature tree.
2014-01-21 01:17:22 AM
2 votes:
just sayin for the property rights folks

in essence you do not own the land or your house
you only lease it by way of taxes
(you know what happens if you dont pay your taxes)

so if the true owners of the property decide you are doing something wrong on "your property"
then you will be corrected
2014-01-21 01:14:26 AM
2 votes:

joshiz: One of the commenters had it exactly right. I don't like when trees are cut down either but to quote: "If you don't like what your neighbors are doing with their trees, move."

If you want to get into a philosophical discussion about the nature of property ownership, take things back to when the land was in its pristine state before anyone owned it and those trees were most likely not even there.

Flip the whole thing around and suppose you wanted nice shade for your driveway but the only place to plant a tree would be on a neighbor's property. They have no obligation to do so, no matter how nice it would be for the "community".


Depends on the trees, I have white oaks that straddle my property line that are older than the USA, my neighbor was going to take one down when he ran the burried utilities to his house. I told him hell no, that I'd get a lawyer involved if he attempted to do that as they were a major part of why I bought the property and they were half mine. Turns out he was going to take em down as a precautionary measure as he was worried about liability if he weakened em and they fell on my house. I told him if 250+ years of the worst that mother nature hadn't taken em out that I doubted him digging up a few roots was going to do it and that if they started to show major signs of stress I'd split the cost of removal after the recommendation of an arborist said they had to go.

/damn developers
2014-01-21 12:46:24 AM
2 votes:
This D*bag sounds like he is related to my neighbor; the guy got all pissed off when I moved in and tore down an old shed that was in my backyard. The thing was an eyesore but he moaned and groaned about not having privacy on his own deck and how I ruined his quite time. I let him know the shed didn't block the smell of pot which wafted from the direction of his deck. The shed being gone also prevented him from using my property as a cut through because without it he could be seen jumping the fence after stealing something from another neighbors yard.

The D*bag in the article is a renter, if having no trees to look at offends him soooooo much then he can move out at the end of his lease and go live in the woods. He has no permanent
2014-01-21 12:31:50 AM
2 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: I really like large trees.  One of the reasons I bought the house I did was because it has a couple huge oaks on it.

The one in the rear is on my property, but just barely.  When a new family moved into the house whose property borders it and started removing a lot of the vegetation, I was worried they might think the tree was theirs and try to do something to it.  I thought about going over, but 'Welcome to the neighborhood - don't touch my tree' didn't sound neighborly in my head.

Thankfully they didn't mess with it, but I still feel I need to do something to mark it as mine to keep something from happening to it in the future, especially since it stands outside of my fence (which was there before I moved in).

I'm thinking about putting up a decorative stone circle and some mulch around the base so that they realize I have a claim to it.


Just introduce yourself to the neighbors, point out the tree and say "Even though it's outside the fence, that tree is inside my property line.  However, since I realize it's overhanging your property, let me know if I have to prune it or if it's making you nervous."

You lay a claim and accept responsibility for it, so they won't worry about asking you to prune it if it is causing problems on their side of the property line.  Our old house had an oak that overhang our property, and my neighbor did the same thing.  He was 70 years old, said he planted the tree with his dead wife decades ago, and he realized it could cause problems in our ridiculously small backyard (Alexandria, VA).  I didn't have any problem asking him to bring in a tree guy when it dropped a giant branch after hurricane Isabel.

If it's your tree and you're willing to accept responsibility for it, then there won't be a problem.  The downside is that you are liable for taking care of it.
2014-01-21 12:23:52 AM
2 votes:

Benevolent Misanthrope: And if you read to the very end, you learn that he's a renter.  He has no investment it the neighborhood.  He's just another entitled little shiat who thinks the world exists to suit him.

What an asshole.


Oh, so he's a libtard?
2014-01-21 12:21:52 AM
2 votes:
Is it crazy or un-American to suggest that, at a certain point, a tree is no longer one person's private property per se, and belongs to the community? And at that point, should the property owner be restricted as to what he or she may do with said tree?

Yes, moran, it is.  The right to do what you wish with your own property (barring an agreement stating otherwise or a public health issue) is at the heart of the American Way of Life, what little of it is left in this day and age.  Also, could you look or sound any more hipster-ish?  Wow.
2014-01-21 12:13:51 AM
2 votes:
Here's a thought: Plant your own damn tree in your own damn yard. Problem farking solved.
2014-01-20 11:59:21 PM
2 votes:

Benevolent Misanthrope: And if you read to the very end, you learn that he's a renter.  He has no investment it the neighborhood.  He's just another entitled little shiat who thinks the world exists to suit him.

What an asshole.


That was my take on this too. Maybe he should move if he's so unhappy with what his neighbors are doing.
2014-01-20 11:52:33 PM
2 votes:
Seattle has a different view of trees: old ones, like the douchebag blogger loves, have a tendency to come crashing down in winter windstorms.

One of the first things people ask about is about old, dangerous trees in the neighborhood.

There are plenty of trees - cut one down, plant another one.  It's not like there is a shortage of them.
2014-01-20 11:16:47 PM
2 votes:

Lsherm: We had a beautiful tree in the middle of our driveway circle, and it dropped a farking branch on my car the size of a medium sized tree.  I cut that farker down the next day.  It took a farking year to get rid of the stump, but we have a nice longleaf pine there now.

Trees need to be cut down for all kinds of reasons.  If his neighbor needs a shed, then his neighbor needs a shed.  It's not Patrick Smith's place to decide what other people do with trees on their property.  He's free to plant trees in his own yard if he wants.


I had an enormous tree in my backyard about ten years ago. It was big enough that it would take three people to warp their arms around it. One day while watching TV in my family room, I heard a popping sound. I thought the asshole neighbor kids were throwing firecrackers at my dog again. As it turns out, the tree had snapped off a main branch and crushed my neighbor's garage with his car inside, totaling both. The arborist my mom hired to look at the tree said the branch pointed at our house could easily have come down as well, which likely would have killed/seriously injured me and my dog. The tree was down in four days and the wood went to a friend of mine who heats his house with a wood burning furnace.
2014-01-21 02:59:35 PM
1 votes:

Lachwen: OnlyM3: Lsherm: He actually had a good column on Salon for years: "Ask the Pilot." But he would occasionally stray into political discussions and they always ended up like this. He's a good pilot and a good writer when he's talking about planes, but he has some moonbat theories...
See also "Bad astronomer"
What he made his name with was great stuff. Today he's 90% derp.

If by "derp" you mean "science," then yeah, you're right.


You mean that biatching because someone cut down their own tree is "science"? Wow. I learned something new about science today. Thanks, man.
2014-01-21 11:55:01 AM
1 votes:

Three Crooked Squirrels: Keep in mind when bashing HOAs: This is why some people like HOAs.


No, people like this were the ones that created HOAs.
2014-01-21 11:51:41 AM
1 votes:
A garden variety Libertarian folks.

"Do whatever you like, as long as I approve. If I don't approve, you can't do it, even on your own property."
2014-01-21 11:49:04 AM
1 votes:

Harry_Seldon: mikaloyd: Trees also are not immortal or permanent.

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 850x549]


oldgrowthredwoodlumber.com

carbon sequestering at it's finest
/trees are the answer
/wood is good
2014-01-21 10:22:44 AM
1 votes:

walkingtall: bikkurikun: But then again I am living in Europe where indeed there are laws against these kind of things; you can't just cut down trees on your land unless there is a valid reason for it, just as you can't built what you want if other people have to look at it too, and you can't alter historical buildings without permission. I think those perfectly sane rules aimed at preserving the community in the long term as that it is deemed far more important than the individual needs, whether you own the property or not.

And that is why you guys suck I don't care what the liberals keep trying to shove down our throats. The European Union is a joke and every damn country except Germany is a mess. You don't take away propertry rights without a good reason and have freedom. They aren't compatible.


Yeah, fark the future I only care about now.
2014-01-21 08:49:15 AM
1 votes:

OnlyM3: Lsherm: He actually had a good column on Salon for years: "Ask the Pilot." But he would occasionally stray into political discussions and they always ended up like this. He's a good pilot and a good writer when he's talking about planes, but he has some moonbat theories...
See also "Bad astronomer"
What he made his name with was great stuff. Today he's 90% derp.


Wow, never seen anyone rag on Bad Astronomer. What's your blog address?
2014-01-21 08:45:08 AM
1 votes:
How the fark has the cutting down of a tree "adversely affected" the quality of this guy's life?  Sure, he might not like his neighbor's decision, but to ramble on about how the quality of his life is now somehow diminished is utter bullshiat.
2014-01-21 08:27:42 AM
1 votes:

Pitabred: bikkurikun: six-n-tombstone: bikkurikun: six-n-tombstone:

The D*bag in the article is a renter, if having no trees to look at offends him soooooo much then he can move out at the end of his lease and go live in the woods. He has no permanent residence there.

Define permanent. Especially in residential areas, houses get bought and sold all the time. My parents could never afford to buy a house, but lived in the same neighbourhood all their lives, and were active in the community.  I have owned property since I got out of college, yet I've sold, moved and bought new property 5 times since then and never cared much about become active and involved in the community I lived in.  Who is a more permanent resident and who is more invested in the community?

Unless you own an estate that has been in your family for generations, most property owners in residential areas don't live in the same house for more than 20 years.  So if there is a hundreds of years old tree on your property that makes the community as a whole a nicer place, you shouldn't have the right to cut it down just because you 'own' the property for a number of years.

In other words he does not  OWN the property he lives in. He does not pay property taxes on it, he has no investment in the neighborhood because it is easier for him to pack up and move, if he so chooses. Or his landlord can decide not to renew his lease and make him move. Just like your parents did not own the property they lived in, they too could be tossed out by the landlord, ergo not considered to have investment in the nearby community. The fact they were allowed to stay in their place for over 20 years only means they were on good terms with the landlord nothing more. I don't care how many properties you owned. Nor do I care if you think I shouldn't cut down a tree on my property, it is not your property; you don't get to make the decision. Don't like it tough.

Ah, no. You see, renters have rights here, you cant just toss them out. And most people dont rent fron individual landlords, but rather cooperations that are set up with the specific pirpose of providing housing for the working class who cant afford ownership. Even jf you dont have money, you still have rights here.

...did you start having a stroke as you wrote that? Seriously. That's like, consider going to a doctor typing there. Your previous posts are very well put together comparatively.

/not a troll
//srlsy... please tell me you are typing one handed or exhausted or something at least


Haha, yes, had to move, so typing on Iphone while sitting in the metro.. (And I am not a native speaker to begin with)
2014-01-21 07:31:10 AM
1 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: I really like large trees.  One of the reasons I bought the house I did was because it has a couple huge oaks on it.

The one in the rear is on my property, but just barely.  When a new family moved into the house whose property borders it and started removing a lot of the vegetation, I was worried they might think the tree was theirs and try to do something to it.  I thought about going over, but 'Welcome to the neighborhood - don't touch my tree' didn't sound neighborly in my head.

Thankfully they didn't mess with it, but I still feel I need to do something to mark it as mine to keep something from happening to it in the future, especially since it stands outside of my fence (which was there before I moved in).

I'm thinking about putting up a decorative stone circle and some mulch around the base so that they realize I have a claim to it.


The only parts of the tree that are yours are the ones over your property. Any parts of the tree over the property of others can just be cut off by them any time they like. They will do this unless they really like you. That is your responsibility.

You only have claim to the parts of the tree on your property, stones make no difference.

Don`t do dickish passive aggressive stone marking. Mark the property boundary. Be an adult, get to know your neighbors and express your like for the tree and discuss the property boundaries and how you would like them to not cut parts off the tree even though it is over both properties.
2014-01-21 07:03:38 AM
1 votes:
It's people like this that makes us liberals look bad. Some people are just assholes no matter what side of the aisle they're on.
2014-01-21 06:34:59 AM
1 votes:
KidneyStone:
You are clearly a renter and fairly naive.

The bank owns my mortgage because that's how it works.  But when I claim it's 'mine' (quoting because you did on 'yours') I assure you that if someone gets hurt on my property they will sue me and not the bank.  The bank doesn't pay one red cent towards 'my' property taxes.  Should I have called the bank when a pipe burst?  With the way you think it's 'their' pipe and not mine.  Same for the tree that cost me $400 to get cut down lest its dying self smashed my house.

I pay for it, I pay the property taxes, I pay for the upkeep....face it you whiny biatch, it's MINE and I can do whatever I want with the property.


Well, there's a subtlety.  The property is the bank's and it is your responsibility to them to keep the property up.  It's "yours" in all respects but the finality of ownership.

I wonder what the bank would have thought about it if that pipe had burst and you decided "fark it, I won't fix the wall" and let everything molder and rot, which would be perfectly in your rights if the ownership was truly yours.  Or if you'd let the tree fall down and didn't have sufficient insurance.  They can be rather picky about what you can do with their collateral...
2014-01-21 06:08:32 AM
1 votes:
This guy seems to be having some trouble distinguishing  the way life really is and what he thinks it should be. I've got three words for him: Grow up, Sparky.
2014-01-21 04:53:47 AM
1 votes:
Mr. Smith: When people living in some particular place have reason to feel that some particular type of tree should be protected, they pass these things called LAWS.
You see, that way, these decisions can be made collectively, and everybody gets a say - not just you. And then, when somebody goes to cut down a tree they shouldn't, you can do something legitimate about it, as opposed to simply blog whining.
When such laws have been made in a democratic manner, and everyone knows what is expected of them, and can plan accordingly, the vast majority of people are happy to comply - and then, you won't have anything to whine about.
In the absence of any such regulation, your neighbor's decision to cut down his tree is none of your business.
2014-01-21 04:43:16 AM
1 votes:

Marlys: I have a very large cedar (200ft+) on the border between my neigbour's place and mine. He wanted to cut it down, offered to pay for it. It craps needles 365 days a year all over all our cars and driveways. I called the city to see who's tree it was. I was told that it is my tree, and I cannot cut it down, it's protected. The only way I could cut it down is if it were diseased. I like trees, so not a huge deal. It does make a ridiculous mess, I was surprised to find out that I couldn't do what I wanted on my own property though.


Too bad you can't get some copper sulphate in the plumbing section of the hardware store.
2014-01-21 03:37:11 AM
1 votes:
Just an FYI to any morans still reading this thread:  You sound like total jackoffs when you start spouting that 'lib' nonsense.

Seriously, listen to yourself.
2014-01-21 03:21:05 AM
1 votes:
My neighbour removed a jacaranda on his property that I could see out my kitchen window and obscured the back of a commercial property behind it. The purple flowers were beautiful and I was pissed and sad to see it go.
Know what I did?
I kept on living my life because it's not my damn business.
2014-01-21 02:34:54 AM
1 votes:

bikkurikun: six-n-tombstone: bikkurikun: six-n-tombstone:

The D*bag in the article is a renter, if having no trees to look at offends him soooooo much then he can move out at the end of his lease and go live in the woods. He has no permanent residence there.

Define permanent. Especially in residential areas, houses get bought and sold all the time. My parents could never afford to buy a house, but lived in the same neighbourhood all their lives, and were active in the community.  I have owned property since I got out of college, yet I've sold, moved and bought new property 5 times since then and never cared much about become active and involved in the community I lived in.  Who is a more permanent resident and who is more invested in the community?

Unless you own an estate that has been in your family for generations, most property owners in residential areas don't live in the same house for more than 20 years.  So if there is a hundreds of years old tree on your property that makes the community as a whole a nicer place, you shouldn't have the right to cut it down just because you 'own' the property for a number of years.

In other words he does not  OWN the property he lives in. He does not pay property taxes on it, he has no investment in the neighborhood because it is easier for him to pack up and move, if he so chooses. Or his landlord can decide not to renew his lease and make him move. Just like your parents did not own the property they lived in, they too could be tossed out by the landlord, ergo not considered to have investment in the nearby community. The fact they were allowed to stay in their place for over 20 years only means they were on good terms with the landlord nothing more. I don't care how many properties you owned. Nor do I care if you think I shouldn't cut down a tree on my property, it is not your property; you don't get to make the decision. Don't like it tough.

Ah, no. You see, renters have rights here, you cant just toss them out. And most people ...


Renters have rights here too, but telling their neighbor what to do with their property isn't one of them. If they don't pay rent yes they can be tossed out. If they damage the property they are living in yes they can be tossed out. If they are in a lease and the landlord decides at the end of the lease they don't want to renew it, yes the renters can get tossed out. If it is a month to month the landlord can raise the rent til the renter can no longer afford it forcing them to move. So yes a renter can be tossed out.
2014-01-21 02:15:26 AM
1 votes:

Brainsick: /blogger is a douche, so are people who think that 'owning' a house means they can do whatever they want on the property
//9/10ths of you, I'm sure a bank actually owns whatever you are claiming is 'yours'
///renter


You are clearly a renter and fairly naive.

The bank owns my mortgage because that's how it works.  But when I claim it's 'mine' (quoting because you did on 'yours') I assure you that if someone gets hurt on my property they will sue me and not the bank.  The bank doesn't pay one red cent towards 'my' property taxes.  Should I have called the bank when a pipe burst?  With the way you think it's 'their' pipe and not mine.  Same for the tree that cost me $400 to get cut down lest its dying self smashed my house.

I pay for it, I pay the property taxes, I pay for the upkeep....face it you whiny biatch, it's MINE and I can do whatever I want with the property.

As a matter of fact, I may cut down a random tree in my yard just to do it.  I'll find the one with the most squirrel nests.  BECAUSE I CAN.

/Nah, love my damn squirrels.
2014-01-21 02:14:27 AM
1 votes:

Harry_Seldon: tomerson: Asa Phelps: Stopped reading at "my landlord".

Stopped reading at "progressive city'.

Off the top of my head: Honolulu, Seattle, Boulder, Portland, San Fransisco, San Jose, and many more are all magnitudes more progressive than Boston.

San Francisco has better chowder.


A little know fact; every time I read the word chowder; I also hear John F. Kennedy say the word "chowDAH" in my mind.

/ it's quite maddening
2014-01-21 01:46:44 AM
1 votes:

Harry_Seldon: mikaloyd: Trees also are not immortal or permanent.

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 850x549]


You can level an entire neighborhood if you bring one of these down.

That said, the article mentions a single tree removed, in a backyard, as part of an improvement project.

Surely there is an acceptable middle ground between living like a bunch of tree elves and a stumpy wasteland.
2014-01-21 01:31:19 AM
1 votes:

CivicMindedFive: bikkurikun: six-n-tombstone:

The D*bag in the article is a renter, if having no trees to look at offends him soooooo much then he can move out at the end of his lease and go live in the woods. He has no permanent residence there.

Define permanent. Especially in residential areas, houses get bought and sold all the time. My parents could never afford to buy a house, but lived in the same neighbourhood all their lives, and were active in the community.  I have owned property since I got out of college, yet I've sold, moved and bought new property 5 times since then and never cared much about become active and involved in the community I lived in.  Who is a more permanent resident and who is more invested in the community?

Unless you own an estate that has been in your family for generations, most property owners in residential areas don't live in the same house for more than 20 years.  So if there is a hundreds of years old tree on your property that makes the community as a whole a nicer place, you shouldn't have the right to cut it down just because you 'own' the property for a number of years.

Since whatever Euros you have in your wallet right now will eventually be spent on something, just go ahead and give half to me now.  For community.


I think the point is that people don't have the right to remove things on a property if others really, really like it. Not that this is a big issue, healthy trees generally increase property value.
2014-01-21 01:31:17 AM
1 votes:
I'm actually kind of surprised. I would have figured some people around here would be all for imposing their will on property that they don't own; in the most ridiculous manner possible.
2014-01-21 01:28:35 AM
1 votes:

walkingtall: bikkurikun: But then again I am living in Europe where indeed there are laws against these kind of things; you can't just cut down trees on your land unless there is a valid reason for it, just as you can't built what you want if other people have to look at it too, and you can't alter historical buildings without permission. I think those perfectly sane rules aimed at preserving the community in the long term as that it is deemed far more important than the individual needs, whether you own the property or not.

And that is why you guys suck I don't care what the liberals keep trying to shove down our throats. The European Union is a joke and every damn country except Germany is a mess. You don't take away propertry rights without a good reason and have freedom. They aren't compatible.


No, it is the other way around. Freedom is for everyone, not just people rich enough to own property.  Property ownership at most is for the duration of an individual's lifespan, and usually takes shorter as people sell and move. The community outlives the individual, and hence the needs of the community/society outweigh the needs of the individual regardless of what he owns.  And you don't take away property rights, you limit them. Again because no one lives, and therefore owns property, until eternity.
2014-01-21 01:23:07 AM
1 votes:

bikkurikun: six-n-tombstone:

The D*bag in the article is a renter, if having no trees to look at offends him soooooo much then he can move out at the end of his lease and go live in the woods. He has no permanent residence there.

Define permanent. Especially in residential areas, houses get bought and sold all the time. My parents could never afford to buy a house, but lived in the same neighbourhood all their lives, and were active in the community.  I have owned property since I got out of college, yet I've sold, moved and bought new property 5 times since then and never cared much about become active and involved in the community I lived in.  Who is a more permanent resident and who is more invested in the community?

Unless you own an estate that has been in your family for generations, most property owners in residential areas don't live in the same house for more than 20 years.  So if there is a hundreds of years old tree on your property that makes the community as a whole a nicer place, you shouldn't have the right to cut it down just because you 'own' the property for a number of years.


Since whatever Euros you have in your wallet right now will eventually be spent on something, just go ahead and give half to me now.  For community.
2014-01-21 01:20:52 AM
1 votes:
Mr T would not approve of this foo bloggers jiba jabber
2014-01-21 01:11:48 AM
1 votes:
If I was this guy's neighbour, I'd be finding ways to deliberately piss him off and make him move. What an asshole.
2014-01-21 01:02:43 AM
1 votes:

bikkurikun: Benevolent Misanthrope: And if you read to the very end, you learn that he's a renter.  He has no investment it the neighborhood.  He's just another entitled little shiat who thinks the world exists to suit him.

What an asshole.


A renter has no investment in the neighbourhood? WTF does property ownership have to do with investment in the neighbourhood? If he invests his time in trying to make the neighbourhood better he invests in it. A renter who spends time volunteering or being politically active has far more investment in a neighbourhood than someone who owns property but doesn't give a fark. Whether he is right or wrong, he obviously cares for how the neighbourhood is looking, so he invests in it.

I don't get the property ownership fetish. Even if you own property, unless you are in the middle of nowhere, you still live in a community and the long terms needs of the community are more important than the individual short-term whims of a property owner.

But then again I am living in Europe where indeed there are laws against these kind of things; you can't just cut down trees on your land unless there is a valid reason for it, just as you can't built what you want if other people have to look at it too, and you can't alter historical buildings without permission. I think those perfectly sane rules aimed at preserving the community in the long term as that it is deemed far more important than the individual needs, whether you own the property or not.


That's why you don't know shiat about shiat, and think that everyone has to lay down before Lord Pope of DoucheTown. Thanks for explaining that from the start.
2014-01-21 12:57:11 AM
1 votes:

Benevolent Misanthrope: And if you read to the very end, you learn that he's a renter.  He has no investment it the neighborhood.  He's just another entitled little shiat who thinks the world exists to suit him.

What an asshole.



A renter has no investment in the neighbourhood? WTF does property ownership have to do with investment in the neighbourhood? If he invests his time in trying to make the neighbourhood better he invests in it. A renter who spends time volunteering or being politically active has far more investment in a neighbourhood than someone who owns property but doesn't give a fark. Whether he is right or wrong, he obviously cares for how the neighbourhood is looking, so he invests in it.

I don't get the property ownership fetish. Even if you own property, unless you are in the middle of nowhere, you still live in a community and the long terms needs of the community are more important than the individual short-term whims of a property owner.

But then again I am living in Europe where indeed there are laws against these kind of things; you can't just cut down trees on your land unless there is a valid reason for it, just as you can't built what you want if other people have to look at it too, and you can't alter historical buildings without permission. I think those perfectly sane rules aimed at preserving the community in the long term as that it is deemed far more important than the individual needs, whether you own the property or not.
2014-01-21 12:53:17 AM
1 votes:

Harry_Seldon: Bane of Broone: Harry_Seldon: Three Crooked Squirrels: Keep in mind when bashing HOAs: This is why some people like HOAs.

This is why I live in an wonderfully landscaped HOA where our parks and green spaces preserved some of the old growth, and commonly MAINTAIN them.

Do the fees cover the cost of smug or do you pay for that out of your own pocket?

Portland...we do smug

[i.imgur.com image 581x618]


PDX is a lot of hills, hence the permit requirements.  The old owner of my company lost his home because the guy above him cut down a tree, destabilized the slope, and then a big rain happened, causing a minor landslide.
2014-01-21 12:53:05 AM
1 votes:
Our neighborhood doesn't have a HOA per se, but we do have a set of restrictions on removing trees from our yards.  Namely that for every tree removed it has to be replaced with another one, or 3 flowering bushes.

Our lot had numerous cottonwood trees on it, and I lived with them for 2 years until I couldn't take the pollen anymore.  One weekend I broke out the chainsaw and committed a mass genocide (treeocide?) wiping out almost all of them.  Then I sat back and waited for someone to say something.

Been 7 years.  Still waiting.  I imagine that no one else liked the cottonwoods either.
2014-01-21 12:49:37 AM
1 votes:
You think that's bad? My asshole neighbor (who moved in AFTER I was already here) tore down a historic shed in his backyard. When I complained that now he could see me in the altogether, he called me a stoner and suggested I was stealing from other neighbors! What a douche...
2014-01-21 12:44:55 AM
1 votes:

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: I guarandamntee you this guy is a lifelong liberal


He says as much when he laments that a progressive city isn't boot-to-face stomping all over private property rights.
2014-01-21 12:43:31 AM
1 votes:
My husband and I had a large very large chestnut tree, probably stood at least 50 feet high with huge branches that spread over most of the yard and over the neighbors yard as well. Diameter across I honestly could say would be about 40-50 feet. This thing was just huge.

Well we decided to get some landscaping done of pulling weeds black berry bushes trash and other things that I just couldn't get to cause of health reasons at the time. Well while we were having that done we were talking to the landscaping person and asked him what it would take to just cut that tree down. He quoted a price for it and we said do it. Probably was around 2000 to take it down (good buddy discount). Our old crazy lady neighbor with the picture perfect yard came over to the fence and asked me if we were taking that beautiful tree down and I told her straight up yup its coming down.

While I did like that tree and it did provide a lot of shade some things I didn't like was the way the branches seemed to be sagging and one I know snapped off and didn't look right. Plus it was the kind of chestnut, black chestnut I think cause you couldn't eat the nuts they would make you sick but they had a spiky outer shell around the nut. Well a year or 2 before my husband actually stepped on one of those spikes and didn't realize it went through his shoe and into his heel. it imbedded itself and worked its way in till it started causing actual pain. He had to go to the doctor to have it cut out. He is diabetic as well and frankly that was the deciding factor for me for getting rid of the tree as soon as we could afford too.

In the end it turned out to be a good decision we kept most of the wood to burn and looking at the various sized logs of the branches turned out they were rotten. They would have eventually broken off and either hurt or killed someone or destroyed our house or the neighbors place.

To me it was a safety issue to get rid of the tree but I was not sad at all to see the spiky chestnuts go nor having to duck under the heavy branches as I tried to mow the lawn. Now in its place I have a nicer yard and a huge vegetable garden that I probably wouldn't have. My husbands feet are safe from that dangerous issue and I'm very glad that we don't live in an HOA or some other place where you need to get permission to do any little thing.

This neighbor guy that is complaining about the view being destroyed or having to look at an ugly house should be happy he is just a renter. Since he doesn't like what others are doing on their own property I would think it would make it a tad simpler to just put in his last months notice and find another place to rent rather then trying to sell a house and find another place to buy.

So that might be a positive viewpoint.
2014-01-21 12:39:03 AM
1 votes:

Harry_Seldon: Three Crooked Squirrels: Keep in mind when bashing HOAs: This is why some people like HOAs.

This is why I live in an wonderfully landscaped HOA where our parks and green spaces preserved some of the old growth, and commonly MAINTAIN them.


Do the fees cover the cost of smug or do you pay for that out of your own pocket?
2014-01-21 12:38:08 AM
1 votes:
I have a very large cedar (200ft+) on the border between my neigbour's place and mine. He wanted to cut it down, offered to pay for it. It craps needles 365 days a year all over all our cars and driveways. I called the city to see who's tree it was. I was told that it is my tree, and I cannot cut it down, it's protected. The only way I could cut it down is if it were diseased. I like trees, so not a huge deal. It does make a ridiculous mess, I was surprised to find out that I couldn't do what I wanted on my own property though.
2014-01-21 12:34:32 AM
1 votes:
I think that I shall never see
a tard as entitled as this yuppie


Seriously, he spends the ENTIRE article showing how butthurt he is that his neighbors cut down trees he liked for various reasons that seemed good to them. It sounds like the kind of talk my grandpa would have had low level skirmishes with the neighbors over the years... except he never got in sissy fits on the internet about how people should do what he wants.
 
Displayed 83 of 83 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report