Yea, but are you OK with other people defining your place in the world. I’m not.
If I build my own house, with my own things, on my own land (we can get into who actually “owns” land another time), then who is the government to say that I cannot do that. If they want to say I can’t sell the house because it is not safe, whatever, I guess people want that kind of protection from the government. If I choose to live in my own structure, safe or unsafe by their standards, that should be up to me.
There should be reasonable regulation (to protect wetlands, minimal space between homes, etc.) that could give you an inexpensive ya or nah, but the existing regulations are excessively prohibitive. This includes rural areas that have plenty of open space where you would be hard pressed to come across another human being let alone a high rise complex. I think we are talking about small, secluded, eco-friendly homes in the woods. If we are talking about congested cities, I think that is a different story due to that fact that cities are already an environmental disaster.
To say, “I can not afford it, so I can not have it” is a little simplistic and I think you are equating the word afford with money. If you can afford the land, you should be able to do what you want as long as you are not hurting the environment or other people (unfortunately this does seem to need to be defined by the government.) If I don’t have the cash, but can “afford” to commit my time and build it myself (at my own risk), I should be able to do that without the government bulldozing my home.
