U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Rural and Small Town Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 05-25-2012, 08:25 AM
 
5,467 posts, read 5,278,735 times
Reputation: 6568

Advertisements

Land "ownership" is a theft, simple. Just imagine time when the very first tribesmen declared a piece of tribal land to be "his". I'm a thief, I have no trespassing signs since only neighbors do trespass, I may pay for this dearly, it's litigious and overall crazy society. Some people try to hide from that in their private compounds. Yet, parcellization of the land mass (bulk of which is owned by very few % of individuals) further contributes to craziness, misery and Prozac consumption. Humans simply don't feel "comfortable" in the countries where they have no right to occupy space regardless of their income and "ownership" status. It feels like you are a caged animal. Even if I'm an owner back in Ohio I feel caged in the vastness of Kansas, for example. So "owning" something is not a panacea. W. Europeans (with their high densities of population and communitarian history) have much saner trespassing laws. Owners, as a rule, have NO right to summarily restrict access to their extensive properties.

There is "small" difference between Europe and USA. Europe has a history of no string attached communal land ownership. Each village, town, city used (regrettably) to have sizable chunk of free for all to trespass land, it was regulated mostly by tradition. That was land for children and grown ups to play and to explore, that was the land that made paupers welcome. Keep in mind that England was not an exception. Confiscation of peasant communal land in 1500s preceded the rise of urban slums, Capitalism and Industrialism.

People who "designed" and run USA despite their claims to freedom etc. had fundamentally modern (as for 1700s) idea that only certain group of individuals (anointed by markets) has the right to occupy space, own, and rip other benefits of life. European non capitalist tradition for better or worse extended that right to everyone. That's why small towns USA today are so suffocating, they have no public land/space whatsoever. Poor excuses of heavily regulated 1 acre city parks don't even come close. And it's all by design. That's capitalism in a nutshell, annihilation of the commons is a must. And it's not country specific, if you look at the freshly capitalistic countries of Eastern Europe parroting USA styled economy they parcel out land and annihilate public space in the most unjust manner as we speak. Sanctity of private ownership is being born. And if you disagree with my statement "Land ownership is robbery", take an educational trip.

 
Old 05-25-2012, 08:34 AM
 
24,839 posts, read 33,062,157 times
Reputation: 11472
Quote:
Originally Posted by RememberMee View Post
Land "ownership" is a theft, simple. Just imagine time when the very first tribesmen declared a piece of tribal land to be "his". I'm a thief, I have no trespassing signs since only neighbors do trespass, I may pay for this dearly, it's litigious and overall crazy society. Some people try to hide from that in their private compounds. Yet, parcellization of the land mass (bulk of which is owned by very few % of individuals) further contributes to craziness, misery and Prozac consumption. Humans simply don't feel "comfortable" in the countries where they have no right to occupy space regardless of their income and "ownership" status. It feels like you are a caged animal. Even if I'm an owner back in Ohio I feel caged in the vastness of Kansas, for example. So "owning" something is not a panacea. W. Europeans (with their high densities of population and communitarian history) have much saner trespassing laws. Owners, as a rule, have NO right to summarily restrict access to their extensive properties.

There is "small" difference between Europe and USA. Europe has a history of no string attached communal land ownership. Each village, town, city used (regrettably) to have sizable chunk of free for all to trespass land, it was regulated mostly by tradition. That was land for children and grown ups to play and to explore, that was the land that made paupers welcome. Keep in mind that England was not an exception. Confiscation of peasant communal land in 1500s preceded the rise of urban slums, Capitalism and Industrialism.

People who "designed" and run USA despite their claims to freedom etc. had fundamentally modern (as for 1700s) idea that only certain group of individuals (anointed by markets) has the right to occupy space, own, and rip other benefits of life. European non capitalist tradition for better or worse extended that right to everyone. That's why small towns USA today are so suffocating, they have no public land/space whatsoever. Poor excuses of heavily regulated 1 acre city parks don't even come close. And it's all by design. That's capitalism in a nutshell, annihilation of the commons is a must. And it's not country specific, if you look at the freshly capitalistic countries of Eastern Europe parroting USA styled economy they parcel out land and annihilate public space in the most unjust manner as we speak. Sanctity of private ownership is being born. And if you disagree with my statement "Land ownership is robbery", take an educational trip.
Come on my land without permission and tell that to my dogs....

I will watch on trail cams....
 
Old 05-25-2012, 08:42 AM
 
Location: Petticoat Junction
930 posts, read 1,675,769 times
Reputation: 1499
I can't even figure out what he's trying to say, but I note (I think) that he, like many, acts as if the USA doesn't have public lands. We have millions of acres of public lands, available for all to use responsibly. I guess that's just not compatible with The Narrative ©, so it must be ignored.

Still haven't seen an answer to the 'can I borrow your car/walk through your house?' hypotheticals yet, either. Must also not conform to The Narrative ©.
 
Old 05-25-2012, 08:57 AM
 
Location: Northern MN
3,869 posts, read 13,397,606 times
Reputation: 3587
RememberMee,
"Land ownership is robbery"
And going onto posted land makes you a criminal.

So you feel you can go wherever you want and any damage that may happen to the land or crop is justified because you are a human? A free spirit.

Funny you see no trespassing signs on the reservations also.

Then you go and try to cite history.
Kingdoms were patrolled and many parts of the kingdom was off limits to those who did not own the land.
thus posted no trespassing.
 
Old 05-25-2012, 09:22 AM
 
5,467 posts, read 5,278,735 times
Reputation: 6568
I
Quote:
Originally Posted by Driller1 View Post
Come on my land without permission and tell that to my dogs....

I will watch on trail cams....
Man, don't play Rambo OK. You do realize that a determined attacker has a sizable advantage over the most deluded and armed land owner? What about multitude of attackers? Will you lecture them on sanctity of your rights? In my eyes you & me have no God given right to declare a square inch of this Planet to be "yours". You all in this thread act as though divine providence anointed you with the right to ownership. Nothing could be further from truth. Particular socio economic arrangements enforced by heavy police action gave you legal claim to that parcel in an exchange for certain sum of money. That's it. I don't find those arrangements fair, just or reasonable so don't ask me to respect "your rights", those are non respectable rights. Yet, I will not come close to your house, I will not destroy or even steal but forgive me for the "crime" of walking on 100 acre+ properties. Yes, I do "cost benefit analysis" of the "crime". Even more I do agree that "human condition" demands for one to have a place to call his own. Albeit, that need is grotesquely distorted by our particular economic system that disconnect and isolate people. Yet, if your condition demands 100 acre and up plots to feel "whole", sorry, I'll trespass without any "moral" concerns provided favorable cost-benefit analysis. Depending on the state of economy and police state many more people (some very nasty and mean) would trespass. You go, man, play Rambo on them. There is NOTHING except a threat of violence by STATE that protect your claims. It's not your arms, signs or dogs.

We are land creatures. None of us should be able to accumulate land, charge others for access to it, and keep that rent. None of us more entitled to land than others. Yes, laws may say otherwise. But I'm pretty sure there were laws demanding taxed paid to British Empire circa 1775. Concentration of land ownership is ongoing as we speak. Roughly 10% of landowners own 70% of land mass. What's next, 10% of the anointed owning 95% of land mass and less blessed ones attaching hot air balloons to their backs? That's the plan, huh?
 
Old 05-25-2012, 09:36 AM
 
5,467 posts, read 5,278,735 times
Reputation: 6568
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJBarney View Post
I can't even figure out what he's trying to say, but I note (I think) that he, like many, acts as if the USA doesn't have public lands. We have millions of acres of public lands, available for all to use responsibly. I guess that's just not compatible with The Narrative ©, so it must be ignored.

Still haven't seen an answer to the 'can I borrow your car/walk through your house?' hypotheticals yet, either. Must also not conform to The Narrative ©.
The most desirable land is privately owned. Government owns Western deserts and rocks one has to drive thousands miles to access. Governments have "NO trespassing" signs of their own.

You don't understand my post because you don't know any different. It's like me describing Sun to a person who never left his cave. I repeat. EVERY village in Europe used to be surrounded by communal (NOT public) land accessible to ALL villagers without conditions and fees. Land use was regulated by tradition and not by 300 pages of rules and regulation governing your average 1 acre town parks. An average small town USA do NOT have a single acre of public (i.e. very restricted) land for kids to play.

You don't have YOUR land. Don't delude yourself. As it is, your "ownership" is conditional. You own your underwear unconditionally.
 
Old 05-25-2012, 09:56 AM
 
Location: Northern MN
3,869 posts, read 13,397,606 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by RememberMee View Post
I

Man, don't play Rambo OK. You do realize that a determined attacker has a sizable advantage over the most deluded and armed land owner? What about multitude of attackers? Will you lecture them on sanctity of your rights? In my eyes you & me have no God given right to declare a square inch of this Planet to be "yours". You all in this thread act as though divine providence anointed you with the right to ownership. Nothing could be further from truth. Particular socio economic arrangements enforced by heavy police action gave you legal claim to that parcel in an exchange for certain sum of money. That's it. I don't find those arrangements fair, just or reasonable so don't ask me to respect "your rights", those are non respectable rights. Yet, I will not come close to your house, I will not destroy or even steal but forgive me for the "crime" of walking on 100 acre+ properties. Yes, I do "cost benefit analysis" of the "crime". Even more I do agree that "human condition" demands for one to have a place to call his own. Albeit, that need is grotesquely distorted by our particular economic system that disconnect and isolate people. Yet, if your condition demands 100 acre and up plots to feel "whole", sorry, I'll trespass without any "moral" concerns provided favorable cost-benefit analysis. Depending on the state of economy and police state many more people (some very nasty and mean) would trespass. You go, man, play Rambo on them. There is NOTHING except a threat of violence by STATE that protect your claims. It's not your arms, signs or dogs.

We are land creatures. None of us should be able to accumulate land, charge others for access to it, and keep that rent. None of us more entitled to land than others. Yes, laws may say otherwise. But I'm pretty sure there were laws demanding taxed paid to British Empire circa 1775. Concentration of land ownership is ongoing as we speak. Roughly 10% of landowners own 70% of land mass. What's next, 10% of the anointed owning 95% of land mass and less blessed ones attaching hot air balloons to their backs? That's the plan, huh?
My land is not your land just like my car is not your car.
And you will be fined, jailed and or shot.
My gun can shoot more than one attacker .

God didn't give me the right to own a car but if you use mine with out permission you again are a criminal.

That 10% you quote includes a lot of AG acreage.
You know the places all of your food comes from.

Next your economic position in life that limits you from buying your own land is your own doing.

God or religion has nothing to do with ownership.

Gods rights, are very narrow as in null, none, not a one. they are made up by man.

To identify a right as “god-given,” we need an action, a commandment, or a declaration that clearly comes straight from god and such action, commandment or declaration should be so obvious and so undeniable that everyone will understand it.

So, let us see if we can find evidence of “rights” that come straight from god; I mean, that come straight from god as near as we can agree. For Western society, probably most men would tell you that, if anything is the word of god, it is the Bible. That it was determined by a vote of human beings to be the word of god is a contradiction that we will overlook.

I don't know about other religions, but the Christian Bible doesn't contain a hint of God giving anyone "rights".
Rights to own land or the right to go wherever you wish, ie to trespass.
or the right to disregard the law of the land.

but we have this thing called a constitution that does give us the right to own land.
Man will have dominion over the land it is for his use.
I'm using this section of land, you will have to wait your turn.
 
Old 05-25-2012, 10:07 AM
 
5,467 posts, read 5,278,735 times
Reputation: 6568
Quote:
Originally Posted by snofarmer View Post
RememberMee,
"Land ownership is robbery"
And going onto posted land makes you a criminal.

So you feel you can go wherever you want and any damage that may happen to the land or crop is justified because you are a human? A free spirit.

Funny you see no trespassing signs on the reservations also.

Then you go and try to cite history.
Kingdoms were patrolled and many parts of the kingdom was off limits to those who did not own the land.
thus posted no trespassing.
I think I never implied that all the land was "communal" in the recent European past. We all read Robin Hood stories (I hope). All I said that European peasants (up to rise of Capitalism) had a refuge of communal lands that surrounded their villages locked between feudal holdings. "Regulated by tradition" doesn't mean that there were no unwritten rules, and without doubt destroying crops was not allowed. Feudal were constantly plotting and scheming to carve another piece of the communal land for themselves. Circa 1500 English nobility just decided to uproot the villagers and to confiscate all the communal land (it is sacred private property in 2012). Dispossessed villagers, draconian vagrancy laws, 70,000 of public hangings/year locked human mass in urban slums thus creating pool of desperate labor that was exploited mercilessly by nascent capitalists. The rest is history.

Private ownership of land is very recent human invention that followed invention of agriculture and human social hierarchy. It's 10,000 years at most. Human species much older than that. So appeal to some "ancient" moral laws is ridiculous at best.

Last edited by RememberMee; 05-25-2012 at 11:20 AM..
 
Old 05-25-2012, 10:29 AM
 
Location: Burlington, Colorado
347 posts, read 733,292 times
Reputation: 498
Quote:
Originally Posted by RememberMee View Post
The most desirable land is privately owned. Government owns Western deserts and rocks one has to drive thousands miles to access. Governments have "NO trespassing" signs of their own.

You don't understand my post because you don't know any different. It's like me describing Sun to a person who never left his cave. I repeat. EVERY village in Europe used to be surrounded by communal (NOT public) land accessible to ALL villagers without conditions and fees. Land use was regulated by tradition and not by 300 pages of rules and regulation governing your average 1 acre town parks. An average small town USA do NOT have a single acre of public (i.e. very restricted) land for kids to play.

I love the "you don't understand because you aren't as smart as me" posts. Give me a break. It sounds like YOU don't know any better. There are many towns with desirable public land surrounding it in the US, like Flagstaff Arizona, where everyone lives in a tiny lot in town and is surrounded by millions of acres of beautiful forests nearly all for free public use (shooting, camping, hiking, hunting, star-gazing, firewood cutting, cattle grazing, whatever you want (cattle grazing not free). The people there love it this way. However, many Americans, like myself.. would rather have 20 acres of my own un-zoned land in Ohio to use however I want than 1/10 acre in Flagstaff surrounded by millions of public acres. Its a preference... it does not mean I don't "know any different", it means thats my preference for my life. Get off your high horse!
 
Old 05-25-2012, 10:34 AM
 
5,467 posts, read 5,278,735 times
Reputation: 6568
Quote:
Originally Posted by snofarmer View Post
My land is not your land just like my car is not your car.
And you will be fined, jailed and or shot.
My gun can shoot more than one attacker .
You do NOT have your land. Your ownership is very conditional. And I don't think that you have ANY "moral" reasons backing your conditional ownership except a threat of violence by STATE. There is nothing else to it. You didn't make that land, you didn't work to make that land, you cannot ever make that land. As many people discovered throughout human history - threat of state violence sometimes getting really weak all way to zero. Don't be ridiculous with your guns, they will not protect you, only strong police state is behind your claim.

Quote:
God didn't give me the right to own a car but if you use mine with out permission you again are a criminal.
Ah, sweet baby Jesus didn't give you the right to own a car but he gave you a theoretical right to fence off 1000000... acres and call your own? Apparently, he was little bit vague on the nuts and bolts of ocean surface, sun shine and breathing air ownership. Those remain to be privatized.

Quote:
That 10% you quote includes a lot of AG acreage.
You know the places all of your food comes from.
So what? Sweet baby Jesus restricts access to fields after harvest too? What a busy beaver.

Quote:
Next your economic position in life that limits you from buying your own land is your own doing.
Who says, what moral code, what religious or philosophy book that only people with certain sum of $ should have the right to occupy land space, breath air, drink water, see sunshine? That's your particular brain conditioning nothing else. As I said, I own land yet ownership doesn't make me any freer than a caged animal is. A conditional right to occupy space free of charge is what human nature demands. That's what we had for tens of thousands of years of our social evolution.


Quote:
God or religion has nothing to do with ownership.
What does give you the right to restrict access to a particular land surface except a threat of violence? If there is nothing else than violence backing your claim, does it mean that greater threat of violence offered by somebody else would void your claim? That's how things are settled in the wild.

Last edited by RememberMee; 05-25-2012 at 10:46 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Rural and Small Town Living
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top