jump to last post 1-10 of 10 discussions (52 posts)

What if there was no land ownership?

  1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
    Kathryn L Hillposted 18 months ago

    Can you imagine what life would be like without land ownership?
    Its a very interesting mind-expanding exercise...
      and very mind boggling.
    ...and yet the majority of the indigenous people lived on this continent without owning land.
    When you think about it, how CAN anyone truly OWN land? Some tribes tried to claim their territories because they were farmers. These were the more waring types of tribes.

    We are so used to the concept of buying a house or two or three that this goal seems to make life go around. Without this goal/reality/concept, what would life be like?

    If society decided to try for a more anarchistic existence, could it transition away from the pursuit of land ownership?

    Personally, I don't believe we will ever willingly stop playing "Monopoly".

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 18 months ago in reply to this

      No homes.  No factories.  No sewage treatment facilities.  No roads.  No energy production plants.  No water production.  No mines or quarries to produce raw materials.  No significant food production. 

      The stone age peoples were able to live in spite of this because they were hunter gatherers, without large populations.  Any real population growth requires ownership of land, whether by government (communism, socialism) or individuals.

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
        Kathryn L Hillposted 18 months ago in reply to this

        …groups of people living together, some wandering nomadically, some living as large tribes of family members and friends... car production would cease.
        no need for gas or oil as travel would not be undertaken…. too much work to do on a local level, either wandering and setting up tents, or maintaining farm-lots where people have rolled cars to live in. (Farm-lots would be abandoned parking lots claimed as territories to live on in a communal way.) They would, of course, need land nearby to farm. They would have to tear up asphalt and cement. Roads would stop being maintained and pipes would not be replaced for water distribution. The farm lots would have to be near natural sources of water. Commune members would most likely own guns and ammunition to protect their territories. Water and ammo would become as valuable as gold.
        Those with the most ammo/water source would survive and rule. They would become ruthless in quest for power and might even take slaves… I dare not imagine further.
        So much for anarchy.

        1. janesix profile image59
          janesixposted 18 months ago in reply to this

          I'm glad you finally thought this through. Anarchy isn't good for anyone.

          1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
            Kathryn L Hillposted 18 months ago in reply to this

            As you know I think things through "out loud" to analyze them objectively. No need to insult me. lol

            1. janesix profile image59
              janesixposted 18 months ago in reply to this

              LOL, so worries, I do the same thing all the time.

              I wasn't trying to insult you:)

              1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
                Kathryn L Hillposted 18 months ago in reply to this

                (you said "finally"…)
                Anyway, I would love it if an anarchist would enter.

                Calling all Anarchists!!!
                ( I mean, you don't have to wait for a national holiday to insult!)

            2. dianetrotter profile image82
              dianetrotterposted 18 months ago in reply to this

              You and I are alike Kathryn.  I say things and people think I'm nuts.  I tell them it's for the sake of conversation and getting the viewpoint of others.  There is no right or wrong response, just "What do you think?"

              1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
                Kathryn L Hillposted 18 months ago in reply to this

                Right. I am bored with my own opinion, usually based on a limited amount of actual facts. Others' insights and points of view are interesting. Also, I prefer understanding an issue objectively, rather than subjectively.
                (Although, I do have an agenda…see below.)

                PS Keep up the good work, Diane.

        2. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 18 months ago in reply to this

          You're part way there.  But it's hard to tear up reinforced concrete roads with a few sticks, and there is no iron to make anything else.  Or fuel to run existing equipment.  And no chemicals to make gunpowder or bullets. 

          Nor will putting farms (no farms, either) by rivers help as there are no pumps or energy to power the pumps if there were any.  Even digging a ditch from the river is fruitless as you don't have the land to dig on. 

          No livestock as you can't pasture them or fence them in - we'll become vegetarians.  Better not die, though - no graveyards (would that be the new meat source?).

          1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
            Kathryn L Hillposted 18 months ago in reply to this

            ...or to serve what they glean from graveyards to their captives.
            So much for anarchy.

          2. John Holden profile image59
            John Holdenposted 18 months ago in reply to this

            What's any of that got to do with land ownership?
            Without the vast amount of capital tied up in landownership there would be so much more to develop those things that you think are dependant on land ownership!

            If you doubt the stupidity of land ownership look at the UK where the majority of the cost of a new house can be taken up in land costs.

            1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
              Kathryn L Hillposted 18 months ago in reply to this

              What if land ownership was outlawed in Britain?
                The return of knights on horses wearing armor?
              (and white satin underneath of course.)
              not even!

              1. John Holden profile image59
                John Holdenposted 18 months ago in reply to this

                More likely the return of affordable housing.

                1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
                  Kathryn L Hillposted 18 months ago in reply to this

                  I think here, it is a matter of supply and demand.

                  1. John Holden profile image59
                    John Holdenposted 18 months ago in reply to this

                    It is here, demand far outstrips supply.

            2. wilderness profile image97
              wildernessposted 18 months ago in reply to this

              Where will you build your auto factory?  Where will you get the ore to put in the smelters, and where will you put the smelters to make the steel to build cars with?  How will you get the steel to the auto factory without roads?

              1. John Holden profile image59
                John Holdenposted 18 months ago in reply to this

                None of those things require land ownership.

                1. wilderness profile image97
                  wildernessposted 18 months ago in reply to this

                  I repeat, where will you put your automobile factory if you have no land to put it on?  Float it in the clouds?  Where will you dig the ore to make the steel for the plant, and how will you get it to the manufacturing facility?

                  1. John Holden profile image59
                    John Holdenposted 18 months ago in reply to this

                    Where has all the land gone?

    2. PhoenixV profile image80
      PhoenixVposted 18 months ago in reply to this

      As long as there are property taxes, no one owns land.  But then again if there were no property taxes, children would be forced into the mines to shovel coal, society would come to a grinding halt and more than likely the world would stop spinning on it's axis.

  2. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
    Kathryn L Hillposted 18 months ago
    1. John Holden profile image59
      John Holdenposted 18 months ago in reply to this

      "The state’s planning laws means that land for housing is sold at over-inflated prices by the land-owning classes. For those at the bottom of the social scale even being able to rent or buy a small home is becoming increasingly difficult."

  3. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
    Kathryn L Hillposted 18 months ago

    Will I never own the land under my house here in US?? yikes
    I am working and struggling for only this shack?
    It (this shack) does seem way (edit: extremely) over priced, if that's the case.

  4. steve8miller profile image88
    steve8millerposted 18 months ago

    Oh I wish that were reality. To exchange this demonic artificial simulated reality with true God given reality would be a blessing!

    I have a feeling that God is going to come through for us all who want to go back to the reality God gave us.

    1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
      Kathryn L Hillposted 18 months ago in reply to this

      - are you an anarchist?
      How do you view common land ownership as opposed to state land ownership.

      1. steve8miller profile image88
        steve8millerposted 18 months ago in reply to this

        I believe no one should tell anyone what to do so I am no communist. I also do not believe in the state absorbing all the land in these national parks and telling people when they can go in and out. I also do not believe in the banks telling you that your house is a bank and having you barrow against it, thus people on fixed income loose their house.

        I believe we should not disassemble the nuclear family. I believe we are being destroyed slowly but surely by the dismantled nuclear family.

        Because I believe that we should all live together as families on farms, like the Amish they have it right. I guess I would be called an Amish man stuck in a world gone mad.

        God gave us the land and some people have tons of money and right now they are stealing all the land look at the BLM. Everyone will see soon enough what we have allowed to take place in America and around the world.

        But hey do not take it from me just turn on your television and wait until September rolls around. After September the people (I won't say you I don't know your understanding of reality) will realize what they have given up to live in this brave new world. It is a brave new world indeed.

        They seek to undermine the reality God gave us and this world will surely pay for that. Microchips, televisions, computer pets, and so on while oil washes upon the shores and radiation baths us and the sky is full of toxins.

        But hey maybe they all can live forever in this bodies we have, that one goal shows me how insane and delusional they really are. The body is a vessel and the masses worship it, not realizing their own true power. The deception is getting so heavy now it will not be too long before it crashes upon all our heads.

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
          Kathryn L Hillposted 18 months ago in reply to this

          I agree, steve8miller, except for the farm part.
          We are/were fine in cities. Farm life is not for everyone. City life is okay. Why do you not agree with cities? People can live harmoniously and happily in cities with all modern conveniences, including technological items. We need the discipline to use technology for good, not bad. I believe some day we will stop going ga ga over the latest items .. (now, the apple watches) and get back to real living.

          BTW:  Equal opportunity is provided by the Constitution…  Land ownership made this country get up and go.

          I agree with your comment about the gov't taking land. Obama just took some of our mountain areas away from people who had homes there:

          "President Obama designated the San Gabriel Mountains outside of Los Angeles as a national monument Friday, setting aside 346,177 acres of national forest as a recreational area.
          Using his authority under a 108-year-old law, Obama's executive action will permanently protect the forest from development and set it aside as an outdoor recreation destination.
          The move is not without controversy. Some park neighbors worry about what the move would mean for fire suppression efforts and restrictions on hunting and off-road vehicles.
          The San Gabriel Mountains National Monument is the 177th such designation since President Theodore Roosevelt signed the Antiquities Act in 1906. Obama has established or expanded 13 of them, all but one of them without congressional approval.
          And I'm not finished," Obama said, hinting that he was actively considering additional national monuments."
          http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/poli … /17027331/

  5. steve8miller profile image88
    steve8millerposted 18 months ago

    THE FARM - BEST HOME OF THE FAMILY - MAIN
    SOURCE OF NATIONAL WEALTH - FOUNDATION OF
    CIVILIZED SOCIETY - THE NATURAL PROVIDENCE

    Union Station
    Quote East Side inscription.

    1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
      Kathryn L Hillposted 18 months ago in reply to this

      How do I get one?

      1. steve8miller profile image88
        steve8millerposted 18 months ago in reply to this

        The next line on that building talks about how the "Railroad" elite power house bought up the land and created a new world. Breaking free from that horrible prior existence of having to deal with our nuclear families on farms.

        Just hope all the Walmart's do not close hope these elites continue to want to feed us. lol

        1. steve8miller profile image88
          steve8millerposted 18 months ago in reply to this

          Interesting article indeed just goes to show.

  6. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
    Kathryn L Hillposted 18 months ago

    Some history
    "The Norman conquest of England in 1066 saw all land taken under the ownership of the monarchy. To this day the monarchy - in theory at least - owns all the land. The Normans changed the ownership of land with the King giving land as tribute to Norman lords and barons and depriving the Saxons. The Domesday book was the first audit of land. And the resulting system of feudalism exacted free labour, goods and produce and free military service to the land-owning classes for the rest of the middle ages."

    http://libcom.org/news/article.php/land … k-10032006

  7. conradofontanilla profile image72
    conradofontanillaposted 18 months ago

    Power for human beings (I am not talking of god or other creatures) is the origin of land ownership. it is by means of power that the Europeans grabbed lands in Americas and other settled lands. We have to deal with power.

    1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
      Kathryn L Hillposted 18 months ago in reply to this

      We have to deal with the desire for power in others.
      So true.
      Usually power has to do with survival…
      and those who have the strongest desire to survive.
      They are also usually the most intelligent.
      Sometimes they have heart, sometimes they don't.

      I have observed that those with the most will-power have the highest IQ.
      Maybe they are also the ones with the most heart...
      hopefully… but look at the state of the world!
      teetering due to the richest!
      Are they helping or hindering?
      They COULD be helping.
      What prevents them from helping?
      lack of awareness of the suffering of others?
      How many have to suffer before they (the globalists) grow a conscience?
      I don't think they care about land.
      - just money.
      true or not?
      unless they really do want own the whole entire globe! yikes

  8. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
    Kathryn L Hillposted 18 months ago

    Jumping ahead:
    Meanwhile, here in the democratic republic of the USA, without morals and education/informed citizenry, the possibility of liberty diminishes. By abandoning The Constitution and not defending our founding principles, we hand over our section of the globe to the globalists. Lucky them.

    Will THEY give us freedom?
    HA!
    No, they will see us as their captives and slaves.
    We will not be allowed to acquire land.
    or have individual power.

    Have fun with that no land ownership, Anarchists.

  9. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
    Kathryn L Hillposted 18 months ago

    Just remember there are more of us than them. We have power in our numbers
    ...if we are on the same page
    United we stand, divided we fall.
    We must keep our country for ourselves.
    WHY NOT?

  10. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
    Kathryn L Hillposted 18 months ago

    Repeating:
    HINT:
    Do NOT vote for either Clinton or Bush!
    OR ELSE!

    I believe we are fighting the Globalists.
    And we, the citizenry, need to be on the same page in the next election.

    We must vote for someone who has NO connection to them.

    Additionally, I also believe we need to to resist any force (influencing us through the news media, educational institutions/programs, movies, etc.) trying to split us up over:
    1. Racial issues 
    2. Cops vs the people issues
    3. Poor vs rich issues.
    4. Youth vs. elders
    5. Sexual Identity issues

    We must not fall for it!!!

    TWISI
    http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/post/130478

 
working