Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
New at Reason
Whose parking space this is, Jesse Walker thinks he knows. His house is in the village though. He will not see me stopping here, to watch his spot fill up with snow. But thanks to a network of informal property rights, someone will probably bust my windshield if I try to take it.
VM|2.17.06 @ 12:27PM|#
I FUCKING HATE THAT PRACTICE. NO FUCKING WAY. In our
neighborhood, famous for the parking spaces with chairs, etc, in
them, most of the fucking white trash don't even clear off the
space that well, but they want "their" space.
one asshole who lives up the street, north side, puts a chair in
"his" spot even if we get a mere dusting of snow.
and if one person moves the barrier, and another parks in that free
space, the newcomer risks vandalism. yeah. "economic model" my ass.
"private property" my ass. i cannot disagree with this article any
stronger.
pre back surgery, i used to go out and help shovel people out,
including clearing many cars (didn't touch their cars, however) -
even when I did the labor, people tried claiming the spots. as the
practice is in this neighborhood, i'd not call this informal
property rights at all.
reason #455,366,751 to get that fucker Ritchie out of office.
|2.17.06 @ 12:45PM|#
just another good reason to move to the suburbs...
honestly, i can't fathom how anyone could voluntarily submit
themselves to living with such filth.
|2.17.06 @ 12:47PM|#
I happened to be in Boston over the weekend. And living in
Chicago, I know the practice all too well. (Here's a tip - if you
have a car, find a place to live with a garage or deeded parking
space. Then you never have to complain about the practice.) Anyway,
most of the problem is because perfectly legal parking spots
magically become illegal once the big snow hits. This reduces the
supply of parking spots drastically. So staking claims to parking
spots is the result. As long as temporary parking bans are in
place, temporary parking property claims should also be in
place.
In Boston, part of the problem is that some roads' parking bans are
state-enforced and some are city-enforced.
VM|2.17.06 @ 12:49PM|#
Russ:
exactly why we're psyched to have a garage space :)
where are you in chicago? we're in lincoln square, pretty much
across from the brauhaus. great location.
cheers,
VM
alkali|2.17.06 @ 1:07PM|#
Jesse writes:
Vandalous excesses aside, the only real question is just how
long these curbside squatters' rights should last.
The "vandalous excesses" are the whole ballgame here. The reason
Mayor Menino spoke out against this practice in Boston wasn't
because his sense of droit de seigneur was offended -- he
actually semi-endorsed the practice until the vandalism got out of
control. This is
"... and a pony" libertarianism at its worst.
PintofStout|2.17.06 @ 1:12PM|#
While some people may use the practice poorly, I don't know why
anyone would need to mark their space. It should almost be an
unspoken rule of courtesy to not take someone's hard earned spot.
I'm not talking formal rules, here, just some fucking cilvilized
respect. If someone has worked, quite hard in some cases, to remove
the snow from their parked car, thus freeing up a parking space and
some other asshole from down the street is too fucking lazy to
clear his own spot, he deserves everything coming to him.
My sister-in-law lives in Baltimore and was telling me of shoveling
herself out for an hour or better only to return home from work
with nowhere to park. I suggested she leave the air out of all the
tires (not slashing them) and leave a bicycle hand pump with a note
"Nothing is free, asshole."
|2.17.06 @ 1:12PM|#
I grew up in Massachusetts and went to School in Boston and
spent many a cold morning or evening shoveling out a parking spot
and have no problem with parking squatting.
If you spend your free time providing a service to the government,
I believe that you are entitled to some compensation. After all, it
is not like the Boston city employees would clean up those spots
and make parking available. So if you hadn't cleared the spot it
wouldn't be available to anybody anyway.
As for the time limit, until the snow is cleared and the regular
number of parking spots is available seems quite reasonable to
me.
|2.17.06 @ 1:17PM|#
seconded, VM. You park on the street, it snows, you shovel. When
you get home, you may have to park in a different spot that
somebody else shoveled out. C'est la vie.
Save us the "i mixed my labor with it!" whine. I don't have the
right to plant a crop in a local park and then claim the damn thing
as my property!
Not to mention that leaving a chair in an unoccupied spot all day
long is stupid from an efficiency point of view. A dozen other
people could have used it while you were gone.
|2.17.06 @ 1:19PM|#
I am totally anti-squatting. My friend's roomate does that as
soon as snow appears. It really irks me, especially since I don't
live in their neighborhood and am therefore always forced to find a
parking space there, where parking can be difficult to find at
times. I think that the government needs to be held accountable for
not keeping all of the streets and sidewalks clean. Road and
sidewalk maintenance is what we're paying them for; not paying them
for their fucking leisure.
While some people may use the practice poorly, I don't know why
anyone would need to mark their space. It should almost be an
unspoken rule of courtesy to not take someone's hard earned spot.
I'm not talking formal rules, here, just some fucking cilvilized
respect. If someone has worked, quite hard in some cases, to remove
the snow from their parked car, thus freeing up a parking space and
some other asshole from down the street is too fucking lazy to
clear his own spot, he deserves everything coming to
him.
What about people visiting the neighborhood? Again, I think
government accountability is the issue. The taxpayers pay for road
and sidewalk maintenance, the taxpayers should receive road and
sidewalk maintenance. Don't tell me they can't delve into their
ridiculously oversized budgets and pay some local kids to shovel a
bit and throw some road salt down. WTF.
Jesse Walker|2.17.06 @ 1:22PM|#
Alkali: I thought "and a pony" libertarianism, to the
dubious extent that it meant anything, was about creating
abstract models of how the world should be and not looking at the
actual messy reality of how people behave. In other words, I
thought it was the exact opposite of what I was trying to do
here.
As for whether those "vandalous excesses" are the whole ballgame,
that depends on your definition of excess. I don't live in Boston,
but I have a hard time believing that after decades of spot-saving
the vandalism suddenly "got out of control" in 2003. (Here in
Baltimore, by the way, I rarely hear about people enforcing their
parking rights with vandalism -- though granted, our snow is less
frequent and melts quicker.)
|2.17.06 @ 1:25PM|#
"we're in lincoln square, pretty much across from the brauhaus.
great location"
Yeah. Lincoln Square is brutal when it comes to parking. I'm just
south of there in Graceland Park which is a hundren times more
accessible when it comes to parking.
Is Lincoln Square permit parking for the most part?
BTW, i heard the Brauhaus is going way downhill.
|2.17.06 @ 1:31PM|#
If you spend your free time providing a service to the
government, I believe that you are entitled to some
compensation.
Shoveling out your own car isn't providing a free service to anyone
except yourself.
I agree with VM and Lemur, merely adding that the people who leave
their trash in the parking spots should be charged with littering
or obstructing a public right of way, or some such. Vandalizing
someone's car because they parked on a public street is...very
primitive. (Unless snow has the magical ability to convert public
property to private property, and someone else's property to your
property.)
|2.17.06 @ 1:37PM|#
I second F. Le Mur. The parking junk looks incredibly tacky and primitive, and why anyone should be relieving the government from its already-determined duties I know not.
VM|2.17.06 @ 1:37PM|#
Emme:
agreed. it is sadly picking up speed...
and we're really pleased to have a garage space :) no permit
parking on our street, tho.
Jesse: kudos to you for an energetic, reaction-provoking post :)
Happy Friday to you :)
|2.17.06 @ 1:39PM|#
Although I did agree with one of the finer points of Jesse's article: that parking restrictions should be loosened throughout Boston and other cities.
|2.17.06 @ 1:40PM|#
The whole idea of squatting is so reminiscent of patent rights. If someone goes throught the trouble to shovel out a parking space or create a new medicine, then they should have a right to those things for a limited and defined amount of time. The more time, the more motivation to shovel or research, but at some point it should go to public property. Enforcement through community standards is great so long as it is limited to nasty notes, deflated tires, or a new pile of snow on top of the violating car. Any real vandalism is going too far, but putting them in an equal inconvenience to having to shovel in the first place seems just. If you drove across town and parked, I doubt you would think to bring a pump or a shovel.
|2.17.06 @ 1:42PM|#
Parking restrictions have the ability to actually create parking scarcity and space shortages in cities where parking was previously abundant and accessible. I have witnessed this firsthand.
|2.17.06 @ 1:50PM|#
Nope. Parking space "squatting" isn't reminiscent of patent
protection, and it isn't really reminiscent of squatting either.
Parking space "squatting" is reminiscent of borrowing a book from
the library, writing your name in it, and keeping it.
The arguments in favor of granting property rights to real
"homesteaders" rely on the logic that the land would otherwise
go unused. The logic behind granting intellectual property
rights to inventors relies on the idea that, without their work,
the invention would go uninvented. (This is why a patent has to be
"non-obvious." Something that someone else would have soon invented
anyway doesn't count as "non-obvious.") Shovelling out a parking
space full of snow quite obviously does not count as
non-obvious.
Jesse Walker|2.17.06 @ 1:52PM|#
Parking space "squatting" is reminiscent of borrowing a book
from the library, writing your name in it, and keeping
it.
I suppose it is, if you stop keeping the book after the snow melts.
And if your name magically disappears when you return it.
|2.17.06 @ 2:00PM|#
Snow really does have a magical effect on property rights,
doesn't it? What is this, Narnia?
Hypothetically, if I lived someplace where there was snow on the
ground all year long, I could permanently appropriate public street
parking spaces and library books? Could I pass a parking spot to my
heirs? Could I use them as collateral in loans? Sell them? Could I
just build a little building on my 9x15 homestead? WTF?
PintofStout|2.17.06 @ 2:06PM|#
What taking someone's cleared spot encourages is that nobody
shovels. Why shovel if someone else will take the spot, requiring
you to shovel again.
Having the government do it? Even though it is public property,
where would you have them put it? Perhaps we could wish for a pony
to haul it away.
|2.17.06 @ 2:10PM|#
I suppose it is, if you stop keeping the book after the snow
melts. And if your name magically disappears when you return
it.
Yes, and maybe squatters should be fined and/or assigned points on
their licenses for taking public property as members of the
community are fined when they keep overdue library books.
POS,
You either have the government shovel it onto curbside tree lawns
(also government property) or they dissolve it with road salt.
Jesse Walker|2.17.06 @ 2:10PM|#
Answering your questions in order, c:
1. No.
2. No.
3. No.
4. No.
5. No.
6. No.
7. No.
8. WTF indeed.
|2.17.06 @ 2:17PM|#
The thing I hate about the garbage in the street: when the plow (finally) comes through, it can't plow to the curb. So, the obstructions due to snow last much longer than if there was alternate side parking. (FWIW, we live in Chicago/Rogers Park which is usually really tight for parking. We have a school across the street so our block isn't bad. We also have a 14yo and a snowblower. We do the whole block and usually 6 spaces.)
|2.17.06 @ 2:22PM|#
Interesting note: Paint is among the chemicals that the garbage collectors won't pick up, so some residents in Boston have fought back by putting out paint cans instead of lawn chairs. I don't endorse the practice, but I thought that was pretty clever.
|2.17.06 @ 2:23PM|#
Aside from the author's fondness for the quaintness of having the streets full of crap, the mayor is right. On my block (near The Junction), there is still crap in the street, waiting for the next storm. 48 hrs is plenty.
keith|2.17.06 @ 2:24PM|#
Although I did agree with one of the finer points of Jesse's
article: that parking restrictions should be loosened throughout
Boston and other cities.
How do these cities justify MORE restrictions? New York at least
loosens restrictions during snow storms.
|2.17.06 @ 2:26PM|#
Cold spell in socal, about 55 out now with fluffy clouds.
Informal codes enforced by petty crime provide benefits to
layabouts and looters at the expense of people who work all day and
can't bear to break things.
Or maybe I have it all wrong and we should think of the broken
windows as opportunities for the window repair men and their whole
supply chain, and generally beneficial to everyone. Howdat?
alkali|2.17.06 @ 2:28PM|#
Jesse writes:
I thought "and a pony" libertarianism, to the dubious extent
that it meant anything, was about creating abstract models of how
the world should be and not looking at the actual messy reality of
how people behave.
I thought the "vandalous excesses aside" comment did exactly that.
The reason the mayor of Boston concerns himself with informal
"reservation" of parking spots is the associated vandalism. He's
not getting political contributions from the powerful
anti-lawn-chair-in-parking-space lobby. You can't fairly suggest
that the government action is unnecessary because you've wished the
problem away.
As for whether those "vandalous excesses" are the whole
ballgame, that depends on your definition of excess. I don't live
in Boston, but I have a hard time believing that after decades of
spot-saving the vandalism suddenly "got out of control" in
2003.
The practice sort of comes and goes over time. There are two
self-reinforcing social norms: "Who does he think he is,
'reserving' a spot on a public street?" vs. "Who does he think he
is, parking in my spot?"
The level of retaliation associated with violating the
"OK-to-reserve" norm can rise and fall, too: most of us are
horrified to hear about someone who stopped to deliver a meal to a
sick friend in a snow storm and came back to find all four tires
slashed, but there are a few people who hear that story and
mentally raise the bar for what they'll do next time someone has
the temerity to take "their" spot.
Accordingly, I don't think it's at all inconceivable that in 2003,
someone from the BPD called the Mayor and said, hey, you should
take a look at the number of incident reports we've been
getting.
|2.17.06 @ 2:28PM|#
lol. well, at least I know where you stand.
Look, the important difference between my rights regarding
something I own personally (e.g. my driveway) and something I own
communally (e.g. a street parking spot) is that I'm the only
one who has the right to use the personal thing! Trying to
enforce this right on a communal thing is tantamount to claiming
that it's mine alone. The fact that the melting snow makes this
claim temporary seems to make this OK in your mind, but that's like
someone who stole something returning it. Certainly better than
keeping it, but still not right!
|2.17.06 @ 2:31PM|#
This seems a clear case of either:
1) lack of property rights destroying what could be a viable
(legal) market, thus it automatically becomes a black market.
2) A truly stupid lack of market pricing on the part of the
City.
|2.17.06 @ 2:34PM|#
Say what you will about the vandalism but I must share the
memory of the finest revenge ever used for using someone's
space:
After an elderly gentleman had finished clearing a space a couple
of kids immediately pulled into the space and brazenly walked off
dispite his protests. The neighbors were about to enact righteous
vengance when he waved them off. Instead, he got out his garden
hose and began spraying a light mist into the offending car. It
quickly froze to the car and accumulated. The punks returned to
find their car imprisoned in a huge block of ice. It remained there
as a local joke/landmark until spring.
Sometimes, idealism should take a back seat when vengeance is
raised to an art form.
BTW, I'm in Virginia and it's 65 today.
|2.17.06 @ 2:36PM|#
It may seem petty, but parking is a large reason I have no desire to live in a population dense area. I'm not interested in being tied to a train, and I like being able to effectively use my vehicle whenever I want. Urban living just seems like misery to me.
|2.17.06 @ 3:13PM|#
I don't live in Boston, but I have a hard time believing
that after decades of spot-saving the vandalism suddenly "got out
of control" in 2003.
I think it has something to do with the unpredicitability of some
storms and the inordinate amount of college students from out of
town living in the area.
|2.17.06 @ 3:27PM|#
I live in Florida.
[Cue maniacal laughter.]
Comment by: Pro Libertate
Yes, what is this thing, snow, that they speak of?
Actually I know, I know what it is because I lived in Saskatchewan
for three years, where it not only snows but gets really, really,
really fucking cold. But it's OK 'coz it's a dry cold
don't you know? But now I cry and snivel and bellyache if it goes
below 60. Like Monday and Tuesday night when it went down to about
30.
I remember having this same problem of shovelling out a spot and
having some sob pull into it when I lived in Toronto. But I figured
that was just how life was.
|2.17.06 @ 3:34PM|#
Now I live near Lakeshore, and parking is nigh impossible.
Yet no one claims spots here, as they did in the more "family"
oriented neighborhood. I have no explanation for this
fact.
(The above was posted in the wrong thread.)
I can explain that easily - proximity of parking space to
residence. In "family" hoods, the parking spot is close to the
residence so you only have to schlep the bad furniture 20 yards or
so. Closer to the lake you might be parking half a block away -
nobody's gonna schelp bad furniture up and down 4 flights of stairs
and halfway down the street. And closer to the lake there's more
chance some nimrod without a car will take the furniture
anyway.
|2.17.06 @ 3:37PM|#
It may seem petty, but parking is a large reason I have no
desire to live in a population dense area. I'm not interested in
being tied to a train, and I like being able to effectively use my
vehicle whenever I want. Urban living just seems like misery to
me.
There is a middle ground available, and it's a market solution to
boot: Car sharing. Flexcar and Zipcar have both been very
successful in the NoVA suburbs. There was an article in the
Arlington-Alexandria in the WaPo last year about people living in
near-suburb condos and high-rises giving up their own cars and
using car sharing. Saves them money on gas, insurance and
maintenance, and if their condo or apartment comes with a
designated parking spot, they can sublet the spot and make
money.
|2.17.06 @ 4:34PM|#
I'm not interested in being tied to a train, and I like
being able to effectively use my vehicle whenever I want. Urban
living just seems like misery to me.
Speak for yourself :P
I'm not interested in being tied to a car, and I like being able to
effectively use my feet whenever I want. Suburban/rural living just
seems like misery to me.
proximity of parking space to residence
Also, density plays a role. I've never seen this practice in here
in NYC, where you'd have to be insane to "expect" a spot for you
anywhere.
|2.17.06 @ 4:36PM|#
What if someone invented a car-shaped inflatable with weights
where the wheels would be. To passers by it would look like a car
with a cover on it. Call it the SpaceSaver.
Actually, I think I just did invent it. Anyone want to help with
the idea?
|2.17.06 @ 4:37PM|#
To all of you warm, cozy sunbelt types:
I haven't seen a bug for four months. How 'bout you?
|2.17.06 @ 4:43PM|#
Jason Ligon,
In a big city like Boston, you are almost as "tied to a train" as
someone in the burbs is "tied to his car." Getting around Boston
with a car is almost as frustrating and getting around Long Island
without a car.
People who aren't familiar with city living often assume that
people in urban areas operate exactly like people in suburban
areas, except that it is a lot more trouble to drive around and
find parking. On the occasions that you have to drive, yes, it is
inconvenient.
But the trick is, you don't have to do so nearly as much. And in
return, the people who live in the city neighborhood have a much
easier time getting to, say, Fenway Park, than their allegedly more
mobile counterparts out in the suburbs.
|2.17.06 @ 4:59PM|#
I've lived in both NYC and Philly and never run across this as a
major problem. Certainly, I've seen people "reserve" spaces, but
nothing to the magnitude described in the article. My current block
in West Philly is probably 75/25 family/students. The bottom line
is that there's just not enough parking space available in Philly
(West Philly is 1000x better than Center City, though), and the
public transportation is nowhere near as good as NYC's. Maybe that
should encourage "reserving", but it seems that everyone parks
wherever they can and that's that.
Granted, we haven't had a terrible amount of snow recently. It
seems that everyone shovels just enough to get their car out takes
whatever space they can get into when they come back. Ultimately, I
can't really condone the reservation process. Yeah, you might have
put the work into clearing a space, but you knew full well that it
wasn't yours. Tough luck. Everyone has to dig their own car out.
You didn't do anything extraordinary. It's simply impossible to
have enough spaces for everyone who lives on the block. If I was
away on the night of a big storm, should I be forbidden to park in
the city until all the snow melts? Of course, I'm a good guy and
would never park in a "reserved" space, and there are "freeloaders"
who will take a space they didn't work to clear, but that's life.
Welcome to the city.
|2.17.06 @ 5:09PM|#
I haven't seen a bug for four months. How 'bout
you?
joe, four feet of snow vs a few bugs.
Hmm, real tough choice that one. We have exterminators once a month
for the bugs. :)
And a coupla cubes to keep my highball cold is all the ice I ever
want to see again. :)
And our recent little cold snap has kicked the azaleas into bloom.
Life is good, I say.
|2.17.06 @ 5:36PM|#
On the Urban / Suburban distinction, being tied to trains, and
the like:
I was speaking purely for myself and not in an everyone should be
like me sort of way. I don't understand people eating Brussels
Sprouts either, but that statement says nothing about my respect
for sprout eaters in general.
To further my argument though, it seems to me that cars can just go
more places. Saying that you don't have to go very far is like
saying that the specific place you want to go just so happens to be
close. That doesn't seem to be the case though. There may be
a place to get groceries, within walking distance, but not
my favorite place. I lived in Osaka for two years, and
transportation = train there for sure. Despite having one of the
best train systems in the world, I kept wishing I had a car so I
could get to places I wanted to go.
Then you think, "oh yeah, parking is a pain, nevermind," and get on
the train headed to the closest approximation of your place.
|2.17.06 @ 5:48PM|#
four feet of snow vs a few bugs.
I'll take the snow. I've lived in places where it never snows--that
just ain't right. But then again I grew up in upstate NY, and boy
do we know snow.
the public transportation is nowhere near as good as
NYC's
The problem is, NYC is the only city left in America where it's
easy to live without a car. No other city has the critical mass
considered necessary to prevent most of the shopping from going to
the suburbs. So mid-size cities like Philadelphia are left with
aguably worse parking problems than NYC because everyone has to
have a car.
Larry A|2.17.06 @ 6:03PM|#
I have memories of the practice when I used to live in Lebanon,
PA.
What really blew my mind is that the block I lived on had exactly
one driveway (mine) and during any snow day you couldn't use one
side or the other of the street parking. Finding a space any time
was a problem. Snow time was a pain.
Then we had an opportunity during the renovation of the park that
took up the next two blocks to create a couple of dozen pull-in
spaces on land that was doing absolutely nothing else.
No one else on the block thought creating more spaces was in the
least bit reasonable.
Anyway, I'm another one down here in Texas. Are there enough of us
close enough for a gathering?
|2.17.06 @ 7:07PM|#
Shame. Not a single nod to the Robert Frost
reference.
Here's a Robert Frost shout-out that libertarians ought to
love:
I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I --
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.
|2.17.06 @ 8:52PM|#
The problem is, NYC is the only city left in America where
it's easy to live without a car. No other city has the critical
mass considered necessary to prevent most of the shopping from
going to the suburbs. So mid-size cities like Philadelphia are left
with aguably worse parking problems than NYC because everyone has
to have a car.
Not so, man... Chicago is an easy city to be carless in.
I will say that one of the problems of the shoveling-and-reserving
spots practice (other than the vandalism) is that people, when
shoveling spots, are perfectly content to bury the cars next to
them. Not cool!
|2.18.06 @ 9:44AM|#
Jason,
"To further my argument though, it seems to me that cars can just
go more places."
This would seem to be a good time to bring up the distinction
between mobility and access. Someone with a car in the suburbs is
certainly more mobile. They can to to more coordinates on the map
more easily. If there is a Cosco thirty miles away, it will be much
easier to get there in a car.
But do they actually have greater access to destinations? Someone
living in a major city like Boston likely has greater access to a
greater number of destinations - commercial destinations, at least,
and probably public/institutional destinations as well. Someone in
a major city likely has several places to get grocies close
by.
If a Manhattanites favorite sushi place is seven miles away, he
might have a lot more trouble getting there than someone in
Westchester whose favorite sushi place is seven miles away.
However, the Manhattanite probably has four sushi places within a
few blocks, and twenty more within three subway stops - all of
which will be more accessible to him than the Westchesterite's
favorite sushi place is to him.
As you say, the preference for city vs. suburban living, as it
relates to access, is one of personal preference - do you find
walking through a crowd to be more of an annoyance than driving in
heavy traffic? Would you rather wait on a subway platform, or at a
backed up red light?
I, of course, am smart enough to live in a medium sized city, which
has the benefits of restricting my mobility almost as much as a
major city, while only providing slightly more access than a
suburb.
But the neighborhoods are nice.
|2.18.06 @ 12:10PM|#
Stretch--
The spot-squatting in Philly isn't a center city or West philly
phenomenon. Check out Manayunk and Roxborough. Those neighborhoods
make it an art form!
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245