On another forum that I frequent, we are discussing "nanny city" laws that overregulate a person's property. The kinds of laws that target broken down cars, "junk" piles, etc. These laws are meant to improve a community, but in the end it is my contention that they just wind up being laws that target the poor.

So that got me to wonder: how many of the people who postulate on these things have actually been poor, or know what it's like from day to day?

Let me explain. No, that would take too long. Let me sum up:

A junk vehicle may seem like something that needs to be removed, but what does that junk vehicle represent? What if you are a family living hand to mouth and you don't have the money to fix that car, but you drive to work in a car that is rapidly putt-putting its own way to the salvage yard. Perhaps that car represents transportation; for $200-300 you could fix it up, vs. $1000 for just a DOWNPAYMENT for a decent car; a downpayment you can't undertake because you can't handle the payments. And what if that car has more value than the $40 the salvage yard offers, yet it can't be sold (quite common in 20 year old full sized automobiles with V8 engines)? It may be a "blight" to someone, but let's face it, the poor sections of town are never going to look like the rich subdivisions.

Now let's move on to "junk". What constitutes junk? Scrap metal? Lumber? That lumber might be someone's woodpile; working long hours to support their family does not always leave them with time to cut up pallets for firewood. And it is possible that scrap metal could be for the petty supplemental income for salvage. Is it really "community building" to deny someone the extra $50-100 they might make for hauling in screen doors (screen doors, I must protest that were, not long ago, sitting on someone ELSE's property). We're an oddly hypocritical country; we preach recycling, but we don't support recyclers very much.

I propose that community building doesn't begin with writing tickets for every perceived offense; ESPECIALLY when those offenses are forgiven among "higher ranking" members in the same community. I suggest that if someone's broken down car offends you, perhaps you could find out WHY it is there. Perhaps you could help them repair it so that it is no longer an eyesore. In the process, you may gain a friend.

If peeled paint and falling shingles are an issue, perhaps the community could come up with a way that wouldn't present such a financial hardship to have that roof repaired. There's value in the Amish lifestyle in that regards (and many others...but we won't go there right now): living in a community means if you see a problem, you have a moral responsibility to present yourself as part of the solution, not part of the problem.

If you've ever been truly poor, you know what a hardship citations for these offenses can bring. $100 represents half a week's wages for a minimum wage worker and is not money they can likely part with easily. Taking that $100 in fines means taking food out of the mouths of that individual's family (of course, the solution these imbeciles see is calling CPS to report neglect because of a problem THEY created).

If we're going to start indicting people, perhaps it is time we start indicting people who deliberately target the poor with legislation that drives up rental costs and makes the cost of living prohibitive for a working class worker. Perhaps we should start fining THOSE individuals.

There's an apocryphal story about New York's legendary mayor Laguardia. It is said that he took the bench one day in a courthouse, and heard the case of a woman who stole bread. He found the woman guilty and fined everyone in the courthouse for living in a city where someone had to steal bread, money he promptly gave to the woman. Now this story may not be true, but the moral lesson in it is. If we want a stronger community, we must find ways to make it stronger, not fine people because they lack the financial means to build up their property to our expectations. One of the reason the world's poor can get by on $1 a day is because they aren't fined out of existence.