Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

stuckin2up2down

Do You Respect Land Ownership?

Recommended Posts

Fair enough having a small plot of land that's your own for a home and garden.

But all the land in the country has been carved up and sold off privately. Who often fence it off and stop other people from enjoying it.

Wouldn't it be a better place if land was free and you could just borrow it to make a home?

Surely all land used to be free then someone came along declared that they owned it and demanded people leave or pay up.

Near me some farmers hate people even using the footpaths and deliberately put aggressive heards in to stop people from using them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

66% of the land in Britain is owned by 0.3% of the population. Usually stolen from the commonwealth by threat of (or actual) force. And a large chunk of it is still owned by the same Norman families who were 'given' it after 1066. See https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/17/high-house-prices-inequality-normans/

No, I don't respect that. But unfortunately that ownership is still enforced by the threat of force, so unless I raise my own army there's little I can do about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Land ownership isn't really your problem (land is relatively inexpensive still).

Planning control is what's stopping you buy land and build a house on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is difficult to argue that Land ownership is not connected to population density. Native North Americans had no concept of land ownership but then there where around .5M of them In the whole of Canada/USA. Likewise aboriginal Australians. To these people land seemed endless and ownership irrelevant. As soon as you have an agricultural society in which an acre of land is needed to feed your family and you have to invest in it in terms of labour, then land ownership becomes a matter of life and death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

then land ownership becomes a matter of life and death.

Especially for prominent car parking. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is difficult to argue that Land ownership is not connected to population density. Native North Americans had no concept of land ownership but then there where around .5M of them In the whole of Canada/USA. Likewise aboriginal Australians. To these people land seemed endless and ownership irrelevant. As soon as you have an agricultural society in which an acre of land is needed to feed your family and you have to invest in it in terms of labour, then land ownership becomes a matter of life and death.

It is the clearing and planting of 'waste' or unproductive land that alone gives it value.This began in the UK say 8 -10 thousand years ago, slowly changing a predominantly wooded country full of game to be hunted - into an agricultural one.

The moment a man clears ground, sows crops and makes wattle fencing to hold young wild pigs for winter eating, he has something to delineate as 'his' , rather than yours. Thus 'property' is born. Cultivation and fences keep out predators and thieves, and define ownership.

You can either fight the guy on the other side of the stream with his patch of barley and deer carcass hanging on the tree - or you can agree that the stream is the boundary between you. You make a rule. Rules become laws, made by the landed against the landless. Successful landowners become farmers, then lords of the manor, employers of the landless, then magistrates, then MP's.

MP's make the laws that sustain the landed..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you own a field, how much in terms of depth do you own? Can you dig for 30 miles for example?

The concept of mineral rights is quite ancient too. I suggest a visit to the mining museum in Matlock. The mining of lead in Derbyshire was so important to the countries economy and military that the miners were protected by the King and could dig into anybody's land they wanted- aristocrats or commoners...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   82 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.