Types of ownership

[FirstAscent]

By continuing to post in this thread, you agree with me.

Really?

Absurd isn't it? I agree. Just as absurd as saying, "by staying on your own property, you're agreeing to be taxed".

I don't agree with much that you've said. When you say "By staying on your property", are you confusing owning a parcel of land with owning a book or a sofa?

[1714963743]

1714963743

[1714963743]

1714963743

[1714963743]

1714963743

[1714963743]

1714963743

[1714963743]

1714963743

[NghtRppr]

When you say "By staying on your property", are you confusing owning a parcel of land with owning a book or a sofa?

I take it that's your roundabout way of asserting that owning land and owning other kinds of property is different? Fine, what's your argument for that?

[FirstAscent]

When you say "By staying on your property", are you confusing owning a parcel of land with owning a book or a sofa?

I take it that's your roundabout way of asserting that owning land and owning other kinds of property is different? Fine, what's your argument for that?

Ownership of land does not correlate with ownership of a sofa. Please indicate to me where you have received information that exactly states that ownership of land means what you think it might mean. I'm assuming that you believe that because it has been recorded that you own a parcel of land, you are granted a certain set of rights, but that quite possibly is not the case.

Feel free to show that the rights you believe you should have been granted are in fact the responsibility of some entity. Who in fact is granting you the rights you believe you are entitled to? Don't make the mistake of claiming you simply deserve said rights by virtue of acquiring said property. If you make that mistake, then you're only admitting that you entered into a contract with false assumptions.

[NghtRppr]

Ownership of land does not correlate with ownership of a sofa.

Why not?

[FirstAscent]

Ownership of land does not correlate with ownership of a sofa.

Why not?

Because those aren't the laws. Did you mistakenly think they were? Furthermore, there is no moral justification for there to be any laws which make ownership of a sofa the same as owning land. None.

Let's be very clear on something. There is moral justification for there to be laws which make ownership of a sofa the same as ownership of a sofa.

Sofa != gun != land != animal != automobile != human != WMD != atmosphere != ocean != aquifer

Dig as deep as you want into your philosophical thoughts, but that will not allow you to come up with an argument that you are morally justified in claiming that ownership of one class of thing is equivalent to ownership of another type of thing. You need to seriously question the assumptions you are building your arguments upon.

[NghtRppr]

Because those aren't the laws.

Oh, I thought you were talking about the way things should be, not the way things are.

Sofa != gun != land != animal != automobile != human != WMD != atmosphere != ocean != aquifer

LOL

Genius insight.

[FirstAscent]

Dig as deep as you want into your philosophical thoughts, but that will not allow you to come up with an argument that you are morally justified in claiming that ownership of one class of thing is equivalent to ownership of another type of thing. You need to seriously question the assumptions you are building your arguments upon.

Start digging into your philosophical thoughts.

[AyeYo]

Ownership of land does not correlate with ownership of a sofa.

Why not?

Because the only reason you "own" that land is because the established state has recorded you as owner, thus preventing any other person from claiming that land.  That's one of the reasons you pay taxes to the state and follow the rule of the state, because if it wasn't for the state then you wouldn't own the land.

[FirstAscent]

So, when you own land in California, is it really your land like, say, a sofa is? I know that I can remove a cushion from my sofa. But can a landowner remove any oak tree from their parcel of land anywhere in California? If not, why not?

Hmm. Something is going on here. Maybe owning a parcel of land in California is not like owning a sofa.

[FirstAscent]

Mr. forum moderator, your thoughts?

[TiagoTiago]

If you could, and did, build a sealed box surrounding/within your land, with the contents making you selfsuficient and without producing anything sent to the outside; would that give you any more rights on what you can do inside "your" land?

[AyeYo]

If you could, and did, build a sealed box surrounding/within your land, with the contents making you selfsuficient and without producing anything sent to the outside; would that give you any more rights on what you can do inside "your" land?

Are you boxing off right to the center of the earth?

[JeffK]

By continuing to post in this thread, you agree with me.

Really?

Absurd isn't it? I agree. Just as absurd as saying, "by staying on your own property, you're agreeing to be taxed".

I don't agree with much that you've said. When you say "By staying on your property", are you confusing owning a parcel of land with owning a book or a sofa?

Bitcoin2Cash uses strawman arguments every time, just stop arguing with him.

Dunno how he got to be mod

[TiagoTiago]

If you could, and did, build a sealed box surrounding/within your land, with the contents making you selfsuficient and without producing anything sent to the outside; would that give you any more rights on what you can do inside "your" land?

Are you boxing off right to the center of the earth?

Good question...when you "own" land, how deep does your ownership goes?

[FirstAscent]

If you could, and did, build a sealed box surrounding/within your land, with the contents making you selfsuficient and without producing anything sent to the outside; would that give you any more rights on what you can do inside "your" land?

Are you boxing off right to the center of the earth?

Good question...when you "own" land, how deep does your ownership goes?

Not very deep.

Zoning laws will often prohibit you from doing the box thing, but let's say there are no such zoning laws, or we can assume that within the context of some zoning laws, you could build a smaller box somewhere on your property. Now, let's establish why:

- What you do on your soil won't contaminate everyone else's soil
- What you do to your atmosphere won't contaminate everyone else's atmosphere

However, your box is fragmenting the ecosystem. We can admit that a house, building or road does as well, so we can't use that as an argument if you're allowed to construct a building or driveway.

Does your box have an airlock? Does it measure the components of the atmosphere outside before venting, and then run a filtration process to match the outside before venting?

The point is, the box idea is kind of absurd. What's important is to realize what ecosystems are in all their complexity, and then address those issues.

[TiagoTiago]

Basicly i'm trying to understand how much your influence, or lack of, into the environment affects your rights in your land.

[FirstAscent]

Basicly i'm trying to understand how much your influence, or lack of, into the environment affects your rights in your land.

Can you reword this, or add more to what you're asking/developing here?

[AyeYo]

Basicly i'm trying to understand how much your influence, or lack of, into the environment affects your rights in your land.

More than the libertard crew here wants to believe.  They'll all give ultra-simplistic lines like "well obviously you can't dump toxic waste because that's damaging to the water table and people will sue."

But as firstascent pointed out, environmental effects can be infinitely more subtle than that.  In fact, there can be things you're doing that you and I don't even realize are having a negative effect on me and the world around you.


Let's go back to the box idea and the ground.  When you own a piece of land, do you own just the surface of the ground?  Do you own the airspace above your land?  If you do, are planes going to have to pay tolls to the owner of each and every parcel of land they fly over?  Do you own the subsurface under your land?  How far down?  Is your land ownership a cone shape that extends from the earth's core into space?  How about things moving through your land... do you own the air particles floating around your cone of ownership?  We'd assume you do if your land is in a sealed, self-sufficient box, but what if it's not?  If part of a lake is on your land, do you own a portion of the water itself or is it just the general surface area?  Can you rightfully drain your portion of the water out of the lake, even if it'll do damage to the remainder of the lake?  If you own 1/4 of the lake's area, does that mean you can rightfully only fish out 1/4 of the lake's fish?  How will you keep track of that?  What about a moving body of water like a river that passes through your land... how much water can you drink out of the river before you start stealing someone else's water?

That's just the simple stuff.  Then we can into complex environmental interactions that come with owning land.  If you own 2/3 of a forest, which is a total, connected ecosystem, can you level 2/3 of that forest, thus altering the ecosystem of the 1/3 that your neighbor owns?  Can you hunt and kill 2/3 of the rabbits in the forest, thus leaving no food for the foxes and wolves, something that negatively affects the entire forest, including the 1/3 that your neighbor owns?  Maybe you own the entire forest.  Can you level the entire thing, thus effecting the air quality and infinite other environmental variables for everyone within hundreds or more miles?  If own part of a river that just happens to be the section that salmon spawn in, can you harvest all the salmon eggs because they're on your property, thus leaving no new salmon for everyone else that owns other sections of the river?  

How about even more subtle issues... can you paint your house neon orange and put neon green plastic spikes all over the roof?  I live nextdoor and it'll kill my property value because I'm right next to that eyesore... but you should be able to do whatever you want with your property, right?  Can you manufacture fireworkers in your basement?  You don't mean any harm by it, it's your family business and how you put food on the table, but my house is twenty feet away and if you have an accident we'll all get blown up.  So should you be allowed to do it?


That's just the tip of the tip of the iceberg.  Those are a miniscule sampling of some of the simpest issues we have to deal with in the real world in relation to land ownership and property rights.  As was pointed out, owning a piece of land is NOT at all like owning an object such as TV or couch, even as much as these libtard guys would like it to be.

[FirstAscent]

Basicly i'm trying to understand how much your influence, or lack of, into the environment affects your rights in your land.

More than the libertard crew here wants to believe.  They'll all give ultra-simplistic lines like "well obviously you can't dump toxic waste because that's damaging to the water table and people will sue."

But as firstascent pointed out, environmental effects can be infinitely more subtle than that.  In fact, there can be things you're doing that you and I don't even realize are having a negative effect on me and the world around you.


Let's go back to the box idea and the ground.  When you own a piece of land, do you own just the surface of the ground?  Do you own the airspace above your land?  If you do, are planes going to have to pay tolls to the owner of each and every parcel of land they fly over?  Do you own the subsurface under your land?  How far down?  Is your land ownership a cone shape that extends from the earth's core into space?  How about things moving through your land... do you own the air particles floating around your cone of ownership?  We'd assume you do if your land is in a sealed, self-sufficient box, but what if it's not?  If part of a lake is on your land, do you own a portion of the water itself or is it just the general surface area?  Can you rightfully drain your portion of the water out of the lake, even if it'll do damage to the remainder of the lake?  If you own 1/4 of the lake's area, does that mean you can rightfully only fish out 1/4 of the lake's fish?  How will you keep track of that?  What about a moving body of water like a river that passes through your land... how much water can you drink out of the river before you start stealing someone else's water?

That's just the simple stuff.  Then we can into complex environmental interactions that come with owning land.  If you own 2/3 of a forest, which is a total, connected ecosystem, can you level 2/3 of that forest, thus altering the ecosystem of the 1/3 that your neighbor owns?  Can you hunt and kill 2/3 of the rabbits in the forest, thus leaving no food for the foxes and wolves, something that negatively affects the entire forest, including the 1/3 that your neighbor owns?  Maybe you own the entire forest.  Can you level the entire thing, thus effecting the air quality and infinite other environmental variables for everyone within hundreds or more miles?  If own part of a river that just happens to be the section that salmon spawn in, can you harvest all the salmon eggs because they're on your property, thus leaving no new salmon for everyone else that owns other sections of the river?  

How about even more subtle issues... can you paint your house neon orange and put neon green plastic spikes all over the roof?  I live nextdoor and it'll kill my property value because I'm right next to that eyesore... but you should be able to do whatever you want with your property, right?  Can you manufacture fireworkers in your basement?  You don't mean any harm by it, it's your family business and how you put food on the table, but my house is twenty feet away and if you have an accident we'll all get blown up.  So should you be allowed to do it?


That's just the tip of the tip of the iceberg.  Those are a miniscule sampling of some of the simpest issues we have to deal with in the real world in relation to land ownership and property rights.  As was pointed out, owning a piece of land is NOT at all like owning an object such as TV or couch, even as much as these libtard guys would like it to be.

Thank you for posting what I would've posted.

[NghtRppr]

Let's go back to the box idea and the ground.  When you own a piece of land, do you own just the surface of the ground?  Do you own the airspace above your land?  If you do, are planes going to have to pay tolls to the owner of each and every parcel of land they fly over?  Do you own the subsurface under your land?  How far down?  Is your land ownership a cone shape that extends from the earth's core into space?  How about things moving through your land... do you own the air particles floating around your cone of ownership?  We'd assume you do if your land is in a sealed, self-sufficient box, but what if it's not?  If part of a lake is on your land, do you own a portion of the water itself or is it just the general surface area?  Can you rightfully drain your portion of the water out of the lake, even if it'll do damage to the remainder of the lake?  If you own 1/4 of the lake's area, does that mean you can rightfully only fish out 1/4 of the lake's fish?  How will you keep track of that?  What about a moving body of water like a river that passes through your land... how much water can you drink out of the river before you start stealing someone else's water?

I can point you to people that have already answered these questions. Did you actually think that you were the first person to come up with these questions? Did you really think you could pull something out of your ass that decades of thinkers never considered? I'll give you a summary of how homesteading works. You've never been to the center of the Earth, you don't own it. You don't have anything built in the sky, you don't own it. You only own the land insofar as you're using it. I can dig under you as long as I don't cave you in.

As for moving air particles, water molecules, etc. That's where things get a little more subtle. I'm sure FirstAscent will love that since he's always raving about how complex reality is. Let him try this out for size. You homestead usage rights based on who was there first. If nobody else is using the river, you can damn it up. If someone else has been fishing there and suddenly you cut off river, that's interfering on with his rights. Is it cut and dry like a property line? No, it's complicated, like I said. I'm sure that doesn't matter though. Only statists get to play that card when it suits them. Right?