Why are billionaires buy up lands?

[White pawn]

Bill Gates is the largest owner of farmlands in the United States with about 275,000 acres across almost 20 states

Anders Hulsh Pulverson owns more than 220,000 acres in Scotland at the same time the Crown estate which controls about 615,000.

Shouldn't the poor and average people in the society be bothered?

[Charles-Tim]

The poor to be bothered of what? There are still many lands in the world far beyond that. The rich people that you are referring to will have the legal documents of the lands. And if they use the land for farming, it will create jobs among the people and increase employment. It is a very good thing than doing nothing and making the land stay idle without using it for farming.

[decodx]

<...>
Shouldn't the poor and average people in the society be bothered?

They probably should. But what's your suggestion? 

The logic is simple: If you don't own land, you're paying rent to someone who does. The only solution is to keep your land if you own it, or buy some if you can.

[Merit.s]

Why will the poor be bothered when there are other things they need to be bothered of which is how to increase their income. Can you go and buy a Ferrari when you don't have any funds on you.

Land is a good asset and if it's in a good location, it will increase in value overtime. This is why the rich are getting wealthy because they put their money into assets that will generate passive income for them. A poor man can barely take care of his financial needs because he is broke.

[Mhizlove]

The poor to be bothered of what? There are still many lands in the world far beyond that. The rich people that you are referring to will have the legal documents of the lands. And if they use the land for farming, it will create jobs among the people and increase employment. It is a very good thing than doing nothing and making the land stay idle without using it for farming.

I agree with you, because if everyone owns land, then there will be no means of income for both the poor and rich people . So why should ordinary people or the poor be bothered? Because the same land owned by the rich will still serve both rich and ordinary people at the end of the day. The best thing or outcome is that both parties will benefit from it together.

[Xal0lex]

Bill Gates is the largest owner of farmlands in the United States with about 275,000 acres across almost 20 states

Anders Hulsh Pulverson owns more than 220,000 acres in Scotland at the same time the Crown estate which controls about 615,000.

Could you share a link to where you got this information?

[Dunamisx]

Bill Gates is the largest owner of farmlands in the United States with about 275,000 acres across almost 20 states

Anders Hulsh Pulverson owns more than 220,000 acres in Scotland at the same time the Crown estate which controls about 615,000.

Shouldn't the poor and average people in the society be bothered?

The rich have a brother understanding of how to get positioned for the future at a very good edge, they are not just buying Land because they don't know what to use their money for, but land is a profitable asset that will never diminish over time than to give you higher return, another reason to why they consider buying Land is to serve as a reserve for them to make an establishment in the future, a poor man will not reason in some ways like this because of his current condition except if he is willing to think beyond his predicament as an obstacle.

[Ucy]

Well that's the basic issue with the current model — it potentially allows wealthy individual to buy up islands, and even countries for selfish interest.

 There should be a limit to the private ownership otherwise they could become wealthy enough to acquire portion of the seas, oceans, sky, etc and you pay rent to use them.
But for business purposes and very large lands   the lands should remain lands for the collective while lease (and rent) should be used and be in renewal basis - a long lease for the very wealthy and very large lands can be harmful to the collective .



It's basically thesame issue with centralized/decentralized ownership and usage. Everyone can be part owner, or a single person can own/control the whole thing and rent it out to others. Decentralized  ownership works really well with the right rules/standards, but I have noticed how the wealthy and their promoters can suppress it, for example, I remember it worked OK here to the extent of the public collectively building Ethereum (even Bitcoin) using ICO or something like that. But they tried to suppress thesame ICO via demonization and the overwhelming of the space with fakes, to the extent that many got fed up with the idea. That was basically them trying hard to kill community participation and bringing in private funders/owners of projects.
By the way, it's easier for the system to control the individual than the collective which is part of the reason it favors it.

So, you should be more concerned about wealthy individuals suppressing collective ownership than allowing things to work or happen naturally

[noorman0]

It's not just about owning the land, but how it will be managed. In my country, a lot of land is privately controlled but has absolute usage restrictions, such as if it is green land then the owner is prohibited from using it to build buildings. I think the government will entrust anyone with very large land if it can accommodate basic national needs.

[Btcdeybodi]

Is this even supposed to be a question? And why should the poor be bothered, were their lands hijacked? You have forgotten that as a billionaire they will need lands for future purposes where they will want to build an investment. Perhaps, land is also a good asset, they can decide to sell some of the lands in the future and use the money for an investment and their wealth continues to grow. Instead of building many unproductive houses, it is better to buy lands because it appreciates in value and doesn't need any maintenance.

What the poor need to be concerned about is how they can come out of poverty and take care of themselves and their families, not being concerned about those buying multiple lands. If you have money you can buy lands in any location you wish and no one will stip you inasmuch as you have the legal documents to claim ownership of them.