This was inspired in part by the Bundy ranch/Hammond standoff debate in another thread. So let's discuss this, who owns a given plot of land? The person with the biggest stick usually wins the land. The Native Americans and Mexicans will attest to this, in fact, I don't know of a single border that wasn't claimed in either war, or post-war concessions (limited by my ignorance). We could argue particular laws of various countries which has it's place here but I would like to explore the philosophical aspect as well as the moral aspects. It reminds me of a song by Kansas, called Cheyenne Anthem. "You have come to move me, take me from my ancient home, Land of my fathers I can't leave you nowWe will share it with you, no man owns this earth we're on" Morally I think we can certainly sympathize in how the Native Americans we're treated was unjust, and those who claimed the la,d that they lived on had no right to the land, at least no right superior to the Natives. On the hypocritical side we have modern Americans getting upset about "illegal immigrants" entering into "our" country. Should we give land back to the Native Americans (including Mexicans)? Was it even their land anyway? Who can say they OWN land and declare they have sole sovereignty over it? Doesn't every human have the same claim to this Earth as any other human? How can we be born into a world and have no title or right to live freely on it? If I planted an Apple tree and garden for my family on the land that my house resides on, do I own that tree? It would be hard to live there and feed my family if every passer-by helped themselves to the apple tree I planted and cared for. On the flip side you have people like John Malone and Ted Turner who each own over 2 million acres. Well, let's see what we can come up with.
In America (and all other countries) the government owns everything by their laws and ideas. An individual can not own land. One can rent the land and call it their own but in reality it is just a rental. Have fun trying to "own" land if you don't pay your rent (taxes). By any sane view, the one who owns the land is the one who stakes clams to unused and unoccupied land, uses it, improves it and keeps up their use and occupation.
That's strange, considering governments are a sort of technology created by people, they almost take on a life of their own.
It's an interesting concept, ownership. Land ownership in particular is a tricky thing. All of the above is correct. In a perfect world, that would settle it; You stake a claim, it's yours. But what are the limits to what you can claim? What it someone steals it from you? Kills you and takes it? What if your treatment of land threatens that of others near you? There are lots of fundamental problems with the very idea of ownership itself.
You have some valid points but I don't think government ownership or regulation is the answer to any of them.
Land belongs to the country it is under.. its governing body and its people. It is true that our entire history has had land taken away from one group of people for another group. Internally though, the land belongs to the people of the country one way or another. If the government owns it, people own it. If an individual owns it, a person owns it. So either way, the people of the country own it. Most countries allow personal ownership.. as it should be. If you have an apple tree on your property, it is yours and anyone trying to take your apples without permission is trespassing and stealing. At the same time, I hate the idea of individuals buying large areas of land and making them private unless they have a specific use in mind. I like to explore nature.. so if someone has a million acres of forest, I'm not going to bat an eye at trespassing to explore it if I want. I know what I am doing is trespassing, so I will take my licks if I do get in trouble and not cry about it. So it is a bittersweet thing.. it should be a natural right that you can use unused land, but there is a plethora of other people out there who would have the same right and plenty who are willing to fight and even kill over that right. In regards to ranchers, before the government stepped in.. ranchers would mostly fight amongst themselves in, sometimes brutal, range wars. I wish we could trust humanity to go about this reasonably, but we can't.. and there needs to be mitigation. Like at work, we had blackberries growing. Employees and customers would pick at them here and there and all was good. Then people who hand no affiliation started showing up and picking them.. and it was sparse so we let it go. Then one day some douche bag came and stripped the whole thing.. filling up buckets during closed hours. So now we got that shit on lockdown.. and the next time we catch someone who isn't an employee or customer, we are going to try to get them for trespassing and theft. It only takes one person one time to ruin it for everyone..
The government ownes it. If they want the land you own they will take it and not give a fuck about you. Theyll "compensate" you for the theft though so you should feel a little better about the huge lubeless dick they just rammed in your ass. They also own you for that matter so this is kinda a dumb question
This is true, to an extant. Even local county governments can take your land within reason. It is usually for a purpose to serve the majority of other people though. They usually hold hearings and meetings where the public can come a voice their opinion.. but it has always been that the needs of many outweigh the needs of few. If the majority of people speak out against it, it more than likely won't happen. Pisser of it is though, people are lazy as fuck when it comes to governing their government. They sit back and don't do shit to change something even when they have the power to and then cry after something happens that could of been avoided with a lil effort. My old job owned almost 100 acres of land.. and the county wanted to cut a road through it to join 2 main roads so the people didn't have to drive through their ass to get to their elbow. There was some sort of local meeting about it and they approved cutting a road through. The only thing that stopped them was the amount of sinkholes in the wet land. They lost a backhoe to a sinkhole, the entire thing went under.. then almost lost another so they scrapped it. If they would of been able to complete it, there wasn't anything my work could do to stop them and it would of been for the greater good of the majority of people.
Most people are lazy and most people don't or wont care unless it directly effects them. Local governments even get to dictate what you can and cant do on your own property. My parents are dealing with the town we live in now because they consider the patio we have out back to be a deck and because its a deck it is considered lot coverage and lord knows you can only cover so much of your lot or satan will rise again... Its a fucking joke with a shitty punch line
Yeah, I'm not saying it's perfect.. but if the majority of people felt something is unjust, they need to actually voice it in order for anything to change. It's like where I live, the housing authority doesn't allow window unit ACs. This rule came to be though because the majority of the people in the neighborhood see it as trashy.. even though I think it is ridiculous and that my room gets balls hot from being between the attic and garage.
Fuck the majority. Im a live and letive kinda guy. I just want to do my own thing and have people leave me alone. As long as someone isnt hurting someone or infringing on someone else then stay the hell out of their business. Dont even get me started on housing authorities. I have a strong hatred for people trying to control others. I know you dont have to live there but it still rubs me the wrong way. Fuck how the ac unit looks it serves a purpose and everyone can go fuck themselves. Sorry im in a pretty fuck the world mood right now haha
Please. Please I dare you. Try to kink even one single incident where government confiscated land from someone for the good of the people. Lie what? Did ypi really just say this. Your nativity here explains a LOT. <blockquote class='ipsBlockquote' > They usually hold hearings and meetings where the public can come a voice their opinion.. but it has always been that the needs of many outweigh the needs of few. If the majority of people speak out against it, it more than likely won't happen. Pisser of it is though, people are lazy as fuck when it comes to governing their government. They sit back and don't do shit to change something even when they have the power to and then cry after something happens that could of been avoided with a lil effort. My old job owned almost 100 acres of land.. and the county wanted to cut a road through it to join 2 main roads so the people didn't have to drive through their ass to get to their elbow. There was some sort of local meeting about it and they approved cutting a road through. The only thing that stopped them was the amount of sinkholes in the wet land. They lost a backhoe to a sinkhole, the entire thing went under.. then almost lost another so they scrapped it. If they would of been able to complete it, there wasn't anything my work could do to stop them and it would of been for the greater good of the majority of people. </blockquote> Stealing land so people can have shorter drive times? Greater good.. OK... -Yuri
Well I'm not very kinky.. but in my old state I remember them taking and reimbursing someone so they could build some Section 8 (?) housing for low income people who couldn't afford homes. I'd say that is for the greater good cause it helped to prevent some homeless people.
true. Its difficult tto justify theft. Doing evil for the "greater good".... The fact that people actually believe this nonsense is depressing -Yuri
Beat me to it. Because we aren't the ones fucking it up! Why should I have to leave and just let assholes destroy my home?