In article <1993Apr19.182341.7516@tijc02.uucp> pjs269@tijc02.uucp (Paul Schmidt) writes: >sys1@exnet.co.uk (Xavier Gallagher) writes: >: > >:  >: So?  What does this prove?  I do not object to *property ownership*  I >: just think property ownership should be limited to what an individual >: person/family *needs*.  I do not *need* 200,000 acres to survive,  I >: need about 3 acres at most and could get by on less.  I argue that >: by having *all* property tied up and thus cutting people off form >: the basic level of subsistance that the property owners must bribe >: the rest of us to respect their ownership rights by providing >: alternative means of subsistance.  When we are expected to give >: these peoperty owners (lets call them thieves) bribes in order to >: be able to subsists then we have a sick situation.   The property owners >: are then parasites.   > >I want people to be able to live happy and prosperous lives.  Property >owners cannot maintain a monopoly in the free enterprise system unless >they have help from a coercive government.  When a few land owners get >together and try to control all the land without selling, land prices >will go up.  At some point it will be to the advantage of the land owner >to sell some of his property.  Trying to put a group of people to >distribute land "fairly" would give them "monopoly control" over the >land, and would have the consequences you speak of.  Let's keep the land >out of the grasp of a monopoly and let it exist in the free market. ------------------------------------------- It's already in the hands of a monopoly of the rich because of capitalism of land. Other than government land, saved for posterity and the eco-system as well as government function, the remaining land is owned by a smaller percentage of the people than ever before. The game of capitalism is almost won. The game has only to be declared over and we will have to take matters into our own hands and redistribute it again fairly, or else be enslaved in return for a place to live. Here in central California, already, fewer than 30% own all the property and 5% of them own 90% of it. That's twice what it was twenty years ago. Rents are so high that you pay 60% of your income for rent. If you just have a McJob, all you can afford is one room, if that. Some 30% of minimum wage workers are homeless. Unless you both have degrees in technical fields and are working in them, (in the midst of 30% unemployment in high tech jobs!), you will never own anything but a used car if you choose to have more than one child!!! And everywhere else you could afford there are no jobs. The only way to get there is to save and not consume any more than you have to, clothing used, food poor. No movies, no entertainment,, ect. for about five to seven years, and then, if you've saved $20,000, if you can get together that much, and that's ignoring your kids and working two jobs, then you can buy a home in Arkansas or Missouri outright and live somewhere where they flood every other year! That's an exaggeration if you pay close attention to the flood lines on other people's houses and find a sturdy hill, then you can buy one up there! Also buy a rowboat. Missouri's not so bad, if you like the sensation of sleeping in a sweatbox in summer and your car freezing solid in winter. They really do put those heaters into the dipstick hole to keep them warm enough to start with ether!:) Shit, kill the rich and redistribute the livable property. Kill all of them! -RSW  >I want people to be able to work and gain a basic subsistance and more. >Is there a workable system for what you suggest?  I am always looking >for improvements on the way we can coexist in this world and will give >people happy, meaningful lives, where each individual can reach their >highest potential.  Are you asking for the forced redistribution of >land?  Any system I imagine will lead to unfairnes, pollution, over >popullation, and land mismanagement.  If you know of such a system, >please describe it.  Please be specific, since my imagination cannot >comprehend such a system.  Specifics that I am interested in: >	1.  Does someone get land assigned them when they are born? >	2.  What happens to someone's land when they die?  Can they pass >	    it on to their children? >	3.  Can someone sell land? >	4.  Can someone leaase their land? >	5.  What governmental restrictions will be put on land use? >	6.  Who will administer such a system? >	7.  How much will it cost to administer such a system? >I know that this is alot to ask and will understand if you do not have >the time to answer these questions.  I think I will be better able to >understand what you are proposing, if you can answer these quesitons. >Paul Schmidt: Advocates for Self-Government, Davy Crockett Chapter President --------------------------------------------- The land is simply granted to people who live on it now. Extra is kept for the future. You get to stay where you are without paying rent. Land that supports others becomes property of the state. Farmers are welcome to plant crops that people need according to demand and ability and soil quality. If you want to grow sourgum because you always did, and you aren't doing a good job, then we let another farmer grow sorghum, and you grow something else. When people die the land they were entitled to use goes into the public holdings. No one can sell land, but they can trade places with anybody. No one can lease land. The government will locally distribute the use of the land not used for residences. Residences that are insufficient to the families living there can be traded to the public for a larger house and yard according to need and availability. The local land council who vow to live on their land till death to avoid profit ties will decide fairness subject to review by the state and federal land councils. It will cost no more than any fucking thing costs now with fucking assed rent going down a deep dark hole to the owners! Anyone can submit a request for a larger house or land to start a business on, depending on a valid business plan and community needs. Heavy equipment is subject to seizure for the public good or as needed. Heavy equipment operators are encouraged to keep and maintain their own machine and to operate it at a reasonable salary in service to the community. Companies who own many machines are to be divided among the appropriate equipment operators and the rest to be let to valid operators on a need basis. Cost of upkeep is charged. A guild of heavy machine operators is recognized for safety and training's sake. Their council is a subcouncil to the community council. Etc. Etc. Etc. It isn't so hard to think of a better system than we have. All you have to do is realize that the system we have now is not sacrosanct, in fact it's a rigged game that steals you blind and is the most unfair any system could be already!!!!!!!! The trick is to realize that the old rich have been making the rules behind your back and that it's time to kick them off the merry-go-round. Tax the rich to death. They are the ones that converted your 60's school lunch program into the joke it is today. They are the ones who always cut education. They are the ones who always raise the rent when you get a raise. They are the ones who should be not just dislodged but killed for their abuse. I have trouble justifying the death penalty for a poor kid who killed and didn't know why not. I have no trouble justifying the death penalty for the rich who steal countless human lives to feed their greed! Have you paid rent most of your life? Then you have been enslaved, percentage wise, most of your life. We used to be serfs. Now we are called renters, and we are still enslaved to somebody who claims to own land they don't use and make us pay them for it when they did nothing to own it. Most rents in California are enough to buy the apartment house, paynthe taxes and the insurance and have a little left over to travel with! I have seen the books! I know what my landlord pays and to whom! I know what I pay her. I am being forced to buy her a building and then I will be let out at the other end with nothing, when I had as much right as her to live on this planet! And her child will have the money to likewise enslave my child. I hope I find out when I am going to die. I can make things just a little happier form me to be able to destroy her life as she destroyed mine. And maybe I can take a few other landlords with me, and their heirs. That would be worth it. Then to be able to die before they can do anything to me. That's a poor man's dream. Sleep tight, bastard landlords. You don't know the trouble you are buying yourself as you sleep on my heirs money in your mattress! -RSW