Pirate has posted about this courageous woman's battle before, but the city's determination to force her out, begs the question-off the grid stronghold in the US?
I think she is. The rule she violated was not paying for utilities. They are witholding the other service until she connects up. No, I didn't notice that. One of those North American laws sanctioned by the UN?
All these international laws are Agenda 21 being adopted by municipalities under the guise of sustainable development. They (UN) have come up with a manual of laws to be implemented by all governmental units to standardize the wording everywhere. Links and videos are available for those that want to followup and learn about it. It's like a cancer spreading unnoticed until it's too late.
Apparently she was using the city's sewer system without paying for it, so the capping was justified. You want to use a city service? That's fine, but you need to pay for it. There's no such thing as a free lunch. She had solar panels, so she could have worked out some kind of deal to sell power to the city's power plant, and then used the proceeds to pay for her usage of the city's sewer system. If she doesn't want to do any of that, she can dig a hole and build an outhouse. I agree that the city was wrong to try and declare her residence uninhabitable, but they were not wrong to cap her access to the sewer system.
you are right she was using the waste water part of the service. But what sewer bill is thousands of dollars for 2 years? The court found her not guilty. "the city found her not guilty of refusing to use the city sewer, not guilty of violating codes related to her use of solar energy and guilty of not using an approved water supply. " this all stems back to the water supply. That's why the bill is in the thousands
I don't have any problem with the lady seeking to live on her own, and off all governmental interference. However, when she uses utilities that were installed using community funding, but refuses to reimburse those costs, then that seems to be a moocher to me. Plus, did anybody read the whole article? She has a history of "looting" from others. Not the poster child of resistance of government oppression that I'd pick.
The other problem was that her home was within the municipal boundary, so she had to comply with the municipal codes, which had adopted the International Codes, an American body of codes designed to be internationally available. Virtually all states east of the Mississippi have adopted the International Codes. Under the resulting municipal regulations, she must connect to sewer and water, but is not obligated to use them. Her power source must be approved for safety reasons.
The flaw is in the highly centralized, obsolete model we use for habitation today, driven by 19th century ideas of industrialized society. Better distribution of population, which is easier in today's high power communication era, reduces pollution, spread of disease, crime, and improves security. Widely distributed power sources and communities are easier to enable better use of renewable power and actually improve the natural environment. However, it also drains political power from the big population centers, which is why trying to evolve to a more sensible social architecture will be resisted at every turn.
I'm not parsing something right in your sentence. Are you asking if there is a stronghold in the USA where everyone lives off the grid? Are you implying everyone believed the US was a stronghold for off-the-grid living and this is a cause to think otherwise? Or do you mean the USA was thought of as a stronghold for the principle of private property rights and it's time to rethink that? I'm a little lost due to the brevity of your sentence. On a completely unrelated matter, who designed the artwork for your book? It looks great, but I'm wondering if anyone from The Matrix has written you a letter yet.
hi lionel. last question first. We could even call it the Matrix if we wanted to. Copyrights are very narrow. Keri Knutson is our cover designer. She's got another great one for our second book. My point is, You'd think property rights could override these situations, but more and more counties and cities are enacting laws that are making it tougher for homeowners to be allowed off grid. I know alot of gulchers in here are counting on an off the grid option if TSHTF. I was curious if they were watching the development of this story.
Well, it's a great looking cover. I get your point now - it's about if a property owner wanted to remove any dependency on the government they were living under, could they do it? Cue dramatic movie music as we have a siege scene. The government throws switches and cuts off your internet, electricity, gas, water, etc, and tries to starve you into submission.
No, they can't. At the very least you are going to have to pay property taxes, as I don't know any municipality that doesn't tax real-estate. If there's somewhere out there, please let me know.
You might want to rethink that Robbie. You don't want to admit your supporting religion, do you? 8-) Besides the IRS will hold up your tax exempt status while they review your eligibility to think for yourself and comment on societal conditions. Should take then about 3-4 years to do that.
To live off the grid people will have to move out of the cities and into a rural area.
There was a British sitcom called The Good Life: Suburbanites Tom and Barbara Good decide to leave the fast lane and become self-sufficient in leafy Surbiton.
yes. They are pissed as hell we have those cars and trucks out there.... they are trying to shame off grid homeowners into feeling like they're squatters. I think you'll see more of this in urban areas like we saw in Idaho. take your hand out of my pocket and leave me alone
But I think the sewer is a loser for her. If she uses the service, she should pay for it.
No, I didn't notice that. One of those North American laws sanctioned by the UN?
"the city found her not guilty of refusing to use the city sewer, not guilty of violating codes related to her use of solar energy and guilty of not using an approved water supply. "
this all stems back to the water supply. That's why the bill is in the thousands
However, when she uses utilities that were installed using community funding, but refuses to reimburse those costs, then that seems to be a moocher to me.
Plus, did anybody read the whole article? She has a history of "looting" from others. Not the poster child of resistance of government oppression that I'd pick.
On a completely unrelated matter, who designed the artwork for your book? It looks great, but I'm wondering if anyone from The Matrix has written you a letter yet.
My point is, You'd think property rights could override these situations, but more and more counties and cities are enacting laws that are making it tougher for homeowners to be allowed off grid. I know alot of gulchers in here are counting on an off the grid option if TSHTF. I was curious if they were watching the development of this story.
I get your point now - it's about if a property owner wanted to remove any dependency on the government they were living under, could they do it? Cue dramatic movie music as we have a siege scene. The government throws switches and cuts off your internet, electricity, gas, water, etc, and tries to starve you into submission.
Besides the IRS will hold up your tax exempt status while they review your eligibility to think for yourself and comment on societal conditions. Should take then about 3-4 years to do that.
There was a British sitcom called The Good Life: Suburbanites Tom and Barbara Good decide to leave the fast lane and become self-sufficient in leafy Surbiton.
How about Barter Town in Mad Max: beyond Thunderdome? The entire town was powered by methane from pig shit.
http://watch32.com/movies-online/mad-max...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTcgFAGX-...
they are trying to shame off grid homeowners into feeling like they're squatters. I think you'll see more of this in urban areas like we saw in Idaho.
take your hand out of my pocket and leave me alone