The concept of land ownership is wrong | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 16801269 United States 03/09/2015 11:25 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Oh please, we would all have starved to death by now without private land ownership. Quoting: bigD111 God set up a system of land stewardship. Land could be sold or traded, but it had to revert the heirs of the family that originally owned it. Ownership is only really necessary to the extent that the people who plant crops need to have the right to harvest them. Ownership of things like mineral resources is more problematic. Since the resource is limited, a fee should be paid for extracting them, payable to some sort of common fund, or world trust, to be used for the common good, like for roads, dams, and bridges. Truly exclusive ownership is only necessary for tools and personal effects. Land is like sunlight, air, and water, and it is highly dependent on those other elements, which move around on the Earth with no limit. As many people are finding out, regulations to protect or use water and air effect the use and value of land. We cannot restrict control of air and water to people who own land, and people who own land are effected by the regulations. Land, air, and water need to be considered the same sorts of things with regard to law and regulation. Since we can't make water and air private property, we need to make land common property. When banks own all the land, it defeats the only true purpose of land ownership - that those who sow have the right to reap. It would simplify matters to have those who work the land obtain the rights for a generation by paying into a common trust for road maintenance. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 52154903 United States 03/09/2015 11:26 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
bigD111 User ID: 65945302 United States 03/09/2015 11:29 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Oh please, we would all have starved to death by now without private land ownership. Quoting: bigD111 God set up a system of land stewardship. Land could be sold or traded, but it had to revert the heirs of the family that originally owned it. Ownership is only really necessary to the extent that the people who plant crops need to have the right to harvest them. Ownership of things like mineral resources is more problematic. Since the resource is limited, a fee should be paid for extracting them, payable to some sort of common fund, or world trust, to be used for the common good, like for roads, dams, and bridges. Truly exclusive ownership is only necessary for tools and personal effects. Land is like sunlight, air, and water, and it is highly dependent on those other elements, which move around on the Earth with no limit. As many people are finding out, regulations to protect or use water and air effect the use and value of land. We cannot restrict control of air and water to people who own land, and people who own land are effected by the regulations. Land, air, and water need to be considered the same sorts of things with regard to law and regulation. Since we can't make water and air private property, we need to make land common property. When banks own all the land, it defeats the only true purpose of land ownership - that those who sow have the right to reap. It would simplify matters to have those who work the land obtain the rights for a generation by paying into a common trust for road maintenance. Honestly guys, under the communist system, they were hungry in Russia. Once they did away with it, they were exporting excess grain, and a lot of it. deplorably republican |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 35396489 United States 03/09/2015 11:30 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 59408998 United States 03/09/2015 11:40 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The concept of land 'ownership' is wrong. Everyone should have a lifetime's lease of a small plot of land in which to live, build a dwelling and create a garden to grow food. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44369640 Why should greedy fuckers have any right to more tan their fair share of our world. Wake the fuck up! I agree. We all share this planet. No one owns it. We should all have a plot enough for just that. I would be happy and not complain. I have more than that now and I would give it up for just that. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 59408998 United States 03/09/2015 11:42 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The concept of land 'ownership' is wrong. Everyone should have a lifetime's lease of a small plot of land in which to live, build a dwelling and create a garden to grow food. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44369640 Why should greedy fuckers have any right to more tan their fair share of our world. Wake the fuck up! I agree. We all share this planet. No one owns it. We should all have a plot enough for just that. I would be happy and not complain. I have more than that now and I would give it up for just that. Disband Military, put that money in each respected country to doing that for: 3rd world poverty 2nd world Homeless 1st world Middle class 1st world and up. That easy. End war and starvation in one swipe. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 59408998 United States 03/09/2015 11:42 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 59408998 United States 03/09/2015 11:44 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 16801269 United States 03/09/2015 11:49 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Oh please, we would all have starved to death by now without private land ownership. Quoting: bigD111 God set up a system of land stewardship. Land could be sold or traded, but it had to revert the heirs of the family that originally owned it. Ownership is only really necessary to the extent that the people who plant crops need to have the right to harvest them. Ownership of things like mineral resources is more problematic. Since the resource is limited, a fee should be paid for extracting them, payable to some sort of common fund, or world trust, to be used for the common good, like for roads, dams, and bridges. Truly exclusive ownership is only necessary for tools and personal effects. Land is like sunlight, air, and water, and it is highly dependent on those other elements, which move around on the Earth with no limit. As many people are finding out, regulations to protect or use water and air effect the use and value of land. We cannot restrict control of air and water to people who own land, and people who own land are effected by the regulations. Land, air, and water need to be considered the same sorts of things with regard to law and regulation. Since we can't make water and air private property, we need to make land common property. When banks own all the land, it defeats the only true purpose of land ownership - that those who sow have the right to reap. It would simplify matters to have those who work the land obtain the rights for a generation by paying into a common trust for road maintenance. Honestly guys, under the communist system, they were hungry in Russia. Once they did away with it, they were exporting excess grain, and a lot of it. It's not Communism. God set up a system of distributed and periodically re-distributed land ownership, over fifty year periods. It actually prevented the breakdown of land ownership by breaking up monopolies of the major resource. Fifty years allowed plenty of time to improve the land and reap the benefits, and it didn't prevent the farmer's children from buying the next fifty year contract if they were so inclined. Open your eyes. You don't have to drive around this country for very long before you will see millions of acres of wasteland, houses deteriorating, empty factories. The people who own the land aren't doing very well with it. The uses of the land have been wasteful and stupid almost everywhere. Who owns it? Mostly banks. Absentee landlords. It is wasted almost everywhere. Might as well let people try to do something with it - get creative. The kind of reset God instituted is long overdue. Under this system, people are going hungry, and land is wasted. |
bigD111 User ID: 65945302 United States 03/09/2015 11:55 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Oh please, we would all have starved to death by now without private land ownership. Quoting: bigD111 God set up a system of land stewardship. Land could be sold or traded, but it had to revert the heirs of the family that originally owned it. Ownership is only really necessary to the extent that the people who plant crops need to have the right to harvest them. Ownership of things like mineral resources is more problematic. Since the resource is limited, a fee should be paid for extracting them, payable to some sort of common fund, or world trust, to be used for the common good, like for roads, dams, and bridges. Truly exclusive ownership is only necessary for tools and personal effects. Land is like sunlight, air, and water, and it is highly dependent on those other elements, which move around on the Earth with no limit. As many people are finding out, regulations to protect or use water and air effect the use and value of land. We cannot restrict control of air and water to people who own land, and people who own land are effected by the regulations. Land, air, and water need to be considered the same sorts of things with regard to law and regulation. Since we can't make water and air private property, we need to make land common property. When banks own all the land, it defeats the only true purpose of land ownership - that those who sow have the right to reap. It would simplify matters to have those who work the land obtain the rights for a generation by paying into a common trust for road maintenance. Honestly guys, under the communist system, they were hungry in Russia. Once they did away with it, they were exporting excess grain, and a lot of it. It's not Communism. God set up a system of distributed and periodically re-distributed land ownership, over fifty year periods. It actually prevented the breakdown of land ownership by breaking up monopolies of the major resource. Fifty years allowed plenty of time to improve the land and reap the benefits, and it didn't prevent the farmer's children from buying the next fifty year contract if they were so inclined. Open your eyes. You don't have to drive around this country for very long before you will see millions of acres of wasteland, houses deteriorating, empty factories. The people who own the land aren't doing very well with it. The uses of the land have been wasteful and stupid almost everywhere. Who owns it? Mostly banks. Absentee landlords. It is wasted almost everywhere. Might as well let people try to do something with it - get creative. The kind of reset God instituted is long overdue. Under this system, people are going hungry, and land is wasted. I guarantee if it is wasteland, then it is for some other reason. People have been trying to make a living off the land since the US existed. Boom and bust cycles have been part of it. So has private land ownership. Because of it, we have been a big exporter of excess food. Go buy some land and try what you are espousing, because I am pretty sure you don't see the pitfalls. deplorably republican |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 67216665 United States 03/09/2015 11:59 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: Anonymous Coward 16801269 God set up a system of land stewardship. Land could be sold or traded, but it had to revert the heirs of the family that originally owned it. Ownership is only really necessary to the extent that the people who plant crops need to have the right to harvest them. Ownership of things like mineral resources is more problematic. Since the resource is limited, a fee should be paid for extracting them, payable to some sort of common fund, or world trust, to be used for the common good, like for roads, dams, and bridges. Truly exclusive ownership is only necessary for tools and personal effects. Land is like sunlight, air, and water, and it is highly dependent on those other elements, which move around on the Earth with no limit. As many people are finding out, regulations to protect or use water and air effect the use and value of land. We cannot restrict control of air and water to people who own land, and people who own land are effected by the regulations. Land, air, and water need to be considered the same sorts of things with regard to law and regulation. Since we can't make water and air private property, we need to make land common property. When banks own all the land, it defeats the only true purpose of land ownership - that those who sow have the right to reap. It would simplify matters to have those who work the land obtain the rights for a generation by paying into a common trust for road maintenance. Honestly guys, under the communist system, they were hungry in Russia. Once they did away with it, they were exporting excess grain, and a lot of it. It's not Communism. God set up a system of distributed and periodically re-distributed land ownership, over fifty year periods. It actually prevented the breakdown of land ownership by breaking up monopolies of the major resource. Fifty years allowed plenty of time to improve the land and reap the benefits, and it didn't prevent the farmer's children from buying the next fifty year contract if they were so inclined. Open your eyes. You don't have to drive around this country for very long before you will see millions of acres of wasteland, houses deteriorating, empty factories. The people who own the land aren't doing very well with it. The uses of the land have been wasteful and stupid almost everywhere. Who owns it? Mostly banks. Absentee landlords. It is wasted almost everywhere. Might as well let people try to do something with it - get creative. The kind of reset God instituted is long overdue. Under this system, people are going hungry, and land is wasted. I guarantee if it is wasteland, then it is for some other reason. People have been trying to make a living off the land since the US existed. Boom and bust cycles have been part of it. So has private land ownership. Because of it, we have been a big exporter of excess food. Go buy some land and try what you are espousing, because I am pretty sure you don't see the pitfalls. There are great negatives on both sides of the fence. Without land ownership someone can try to claim something you worked very hard on but on the other hand with land ownership people with great wealth can acquire giant areas of resources such as fresh water and hoard it from the rest of humanity. |
boob User ID: 27087001 United States 03/10/2015 12:56 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 40714803 United States 03/10/2015 01:23 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Do you? Welcome to Hell! Enjoy your stay! |
Sungaze_At_Dawn User ID: 62256035 Canada 03/10/2015 01:40 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The only thing is, the word lease implies a lot of money for temporary, and you can't pass it on to your children, who will not be owning anything at current prices, unlike my grandfather who's morgage was less than a years salary or my parents. Instead of doing that, the first step is to get rid of money and slavery. Thats what it takes. What you're talking about is just one more thing the elite would like to see. The Devil tries to convince everyone he doesn't exist. The state tries to convince everyone they cannot resist. Do not go quietly into the good night. Rage Rage against the dying light! |