Land Ownership
Should land be privately owned or owned by the government? Should there be a compromise between the two (i.e. government owns half and private owners own the other half)? If the government owns the land, what should it be required to do with it and if private owners own the land, should there be a limit to how much they can own?
My Perfect Government 
June 1, 2010 at 4:16 am
I think that all citizens should be given free housing if they cannot afford private land. The government should appropriate sections of its land to private owners, allowing competition between private owners to determine the market. But another appropriation should be deemed “government land,” in which modest housing is built, supplying the necessary amenities for comfortable living for those who cannot afford to buy private housing.
Cities should be built with the sole purpose of building these free houses. Limitations such as how much energy is available to these residents could be made if necessary. Residents of these cities should be offered local jobs, such as handymen, lawn maintenance, etc., which are payed less than those in private cities, but maintain the upkeep of the free cities without having to pay the higher private city prices.
June 27, 2010 at 5:05 pm
greg. More government redistribution of property from the productive to the non-productive darker skinned people? The government does not have land, that lands belongs to the states, and the citizens of those states. We tried this “ghetto project housing” and again more communist crap that does not work. Don’t worry, with sovereign debt collapsing every western nation, there is going to be a massive population drop soon, unfortunately we heavily armed sovereign people will be the only ones around to enjoy it. Yes you can bail out Greece, or Spain, even Ireland, but who is going to bail our the United States? That,s right no one. see you soon.
June 27, 2010 at 6:09 pm
white locust. I am not proposing that the land be racially segregated, as I don’t believe in that. I am only suggesting this housing as a combatant to homelessness, which is a nuisance to both the homeless and those who must walk past them in cities. We do have projects and low-income housing, but I believe that these could be substantially improved, which is better for society as a whole in that the children raised there will have a more positive outlook on life and therefore be more likely to be productive.
I do believe that our population is growing out of control and I would welcome a population drop in the form of less babies, not starvation or genocide. The United States has and most likely will find a way through the current financial mess, though I am no economist and am not sure exactly how we will be “bailed out.” In my opinion, the current financial system is failing and we soon will see a new international monetary system emerge. I believe we will stay a world power because of our massive geological advantage, our current seat as a world power and our spirit of perseverance.
August 1, 2010 at 12:03 pm
It would be best if all land were privately owned. Through private ownership of all land, the markets will be able to best allocate the use of that land to match the wants of consumers. This will prevent environmental issues such as the “tragedy of the commons.”
To understand the “tragedy of the commons,” compare the cattle rancher to the buffalo hunter in the old west. The rancher sees the cattle and his land as an investment, and ensures his cattle population stays sufficient to provide him with a steady stream of income as he sells them for meat. On the other hand, the buffalo hunter can only own a buffalo by killing it. He sees no incentive to maintain the buffalo population and can only make money by killing as many buffalo as he can. This causes the herd to dwindle due to over hunting. Privatization encourages the most responsible behavior.
Regarding the issue of pollution, privatization can lay the foundation for an anthropocentric form of environmentalism. Through privatization, the issue of pollution can be dealt with sensibly as the government merely enforces property rights to ensure that externalities are internalized by the market, rather than setting up arbitrary regulations that have little basis in the wants and needs of the people.