Nobody can own the Earth, and it's wrong to think you do. "Private property" is theft. I don't ask anything from anyone. I don't want any of your welfare, or meaningless paper dollars. I just want a simple, growable 2.5 acre patch of land wherein I can do wherein I can grow and sustainably create everything I need to survive. The fact that you have prevented me from doing this through your oppressive "monetary system" makes you evil. And through your evil you have destroyed the entirety of the Earth, our environment, our ecosystem, and ALL of our futures. And most people today are guilty of this but the especially guilty are the "conservatives". People who ironically claim to be spiritually minded but have ZERO connection with spirituality, the Earth, the environment or life. They ONLY worship the dollar
Nobody can own the Earth, and it's wrong to think you do. "Private property" is theft. I don't ask anything from anyone...
Marianne, work on your thetans.
now tell the board what is stopping you from buying 2.5 acres of arable land
Ummmmmm it's called "money" and "the economic system". Is this even a real fucking question?
>"Private property" is theft.
>I just want a simple, growable 2.5 acre patch of land
>"Private property" is theft.
>I just want a simple, growable 2.5 acre patch of land
Dude there's like 8 acres of land in the USA per individual. Not per family, per INDIVIDUAL. OK? So yeah, it would be fine if not for private property. Not only that, but there are left-wing economic measures like welfare to offset the injustice of the economic system and its private property, but fucking "conservatives" don't support them.
Just wait a hundred years for a megacorporation to completely supplant the role of the government. Then they'll own the Earth and be setting up frontier colonies elsewhere in our solar system.
Yeah it's fucking awful. Pepsi billboards in space and on Mars and shit, and conservatives will defend it all. "That wealth is gonna start trickling down someday" they'll say. "Reagan told us that it would", they'll say.
bruh i need my little colombian niglets working on my coke so i can consoom at 8am
How in the fuck does the word salad you just posted have anything to do with the legitimacy of private property my based schizo posting friend?
Either people can legitimately own land or not. If private property is theft, then you having 2.5 acres of land is theft against everyone who doesn't want a garden there, and instead wants to pile up their feces and piss on top of your gay vegetables instead.
Dividing the land equally doesn't do shit in the long term. You think if the founding fathers divided up the land equally, you'd be happy today? Fuck no, you'd call it white supremacy because their decedents would own everything. In 100 years when our population hypothetically doubles, half of the people would own everything and those new lower class peasants would be talking about how your stupid ass system was theft.
If you kept subdividing, you'd have to gerrymander everyone's property to avoid any infrastructure they built. And how are you going to fairly subdivide further? Are you gonna wait till we double in population and cut all land plots in half? So the non-land owners should just be slaves for decades until then? Or are you gonna cut up land as you go? In which case, who decides who gets the short end of the stick and gets their land cut in half first?
>You think if the founding fathers divided up the land equally, you'd be happy today?
Oh user. You have no idea how the founders felt about private property, do you? Pic related. They weren't on board with the sort of shit we see going on today.
In terms of the rest of your post, holy intentionally obtuse thinking. Yes private property can both simultaneously be theft, and you can have left-wing policies to offset that injustice. Yes, that is possible and not contradictory. I don't know how or why you can even claim differently. A UBI, for example, would help offset the injustice of private property, allowing for people to have the basic human rights to a patch of land, upon which they can grow and build and sustain themselves. And I'm not schizophrenic.
If you get those 2.5 acres, I'm gonna steal your farm and chain you in the middle because PrIvAtE pRoPeRtY iS tHeFt
OK well that's already what you're doing with private property and capitalism. So that's just the type of person you and people like you are. What do you want me to say? You are bad people. Immoral.
You do understand you're just speaking in circles right?
You've argued for and against yourself
Nothing in your left wing rag says anything about dividing up the land equally. It basically says everyone should be able to have a tax free homestead, which every right winger who fundamentally disagrees with property taxes would support.
It also says that if somebody owns all the land but doesn't do anything with it, that he doesn't rightly own the land, which is literal Lockean philosophy on how land is legitimately owned by mixing one's labor with it.
What you are suggesting is basic bitch conservative kindergarden tier stuff.
Is your argument that some rich guy owns all the land around you, but leaves it undeveloped, and therefore you want to mix your labor with the land to homestead it, and demand an allodial title over it? Because that's not left wing, that's basically anarcho capitalist ideology.
>its ok if I own 2.5 acres cuz I want it, but if you do you're a bad person
Bruh, your double standard is showing
Motherfuckin BASED
>Nothing in your left wing rag says anything about dividing up the land equally.
But user, I never said anything about dividing land up equally. You're the one who said that, I have no idea where you got that from. From when I said there are 8 acres per individual in the USA? That is just an objectively true statistic.
In terms of what Jefferson was talking about, yes, he was in fact sort-of talking about dividing land equally, to some degree. De-facto. He wanted to tax people with more land, thus discouraging them from owning all of the land, or becoming land barons. That is what we need in this country, for certain. That is fundamentally the same as land redistribution.
>It also says that if somebody owns all the land but doesn't do anything with it, that he doesn't rightly own the land, which is literal Lockean philosophy on how land is legitimately owned by mixing one's labor with it.
But user, why would you even say this? Are you suggesting the govt seize absentee property? And land that is not being used from private ownership? Good user. You are a left-winger like me. From now on we will work together to try to destroy capitalism and make the world a better place.
>basic bitch conservative kindergarden tier stuff.
OK IDK I thought you just professed your agreement with me because of John Locke, but OK whatever, I dunno
>Is your argument that some rich guy owns all the land around you, but leaves it undeveloped, and therefore you want to mix your labor with the land to homestead it, and demand an allodial title over it? Because that's not left wing, that's basically anarcho capitalist ideology.
Not what I suggested explicitly, but a viable option. You'd have to be nuts to start saying an infringement that cuts that deeply into what we currently consider "private property" is "right-wing" tho. It doesn't matter what Locke said. That's the point, actually. Our country has moved SUPER far to the right from what it was originally intended to be.
It's not a double standard. The point is you need to either abolish private property or make private ownership more accessible through left-wing programs and economic ideas
You do know you can buy land from private citizens and the gooberment right?
Nigger, you can buy seized land for good prices.
Nobody wants your socialist bullshit, so instead of forcing the majority to conform to the minority why doesn't the minority conform to the majority.
Eat my dick no job having, basement dwelling, mac using, commie loving, "progressive" faggot
Land is not cheap. Even when you see something like pic related, looks cheap at first, but then you realize it's at 7000 ft elevation. Literally a height at which you can get elevation sickness and fucking die (I mean, this is unlikely, but if you're not in perfect health such an elevation can be dangerous for you).
So I mean, no. Land is very expensive. That is the moral wrong of our society. And then, beyond that, you have to understand that there are building codes and regulations that exist to keep you buying and spending and consuming. Can't just make a log cabin, or a cob home out of the natural abundance of Earth. It's literally illegal. So no. You're completely wrong. The statism has destroyed everything and private property is the worst sort of statism. If you had a benevolent left-wing system (like we had in this country through much of the 20th century in the 40s, 50s and 60s) then things could be OK. But conservatives robbed us of that paradise
>"Private property" is theft
"Theft" implies the existence of private property though?
You are aware if you're getting elevation sickness you just need to sit for a couple days and your body adjusts right?
Also 35 acres for under a grand an acre, I think you're just a Poorfag who doesn't know how to hold a job and you think you can survive on a farm.
>plants grow themselves, just need water and sun
>forgets about weeds and insects
>...
>on no my crops died
>OP dies because he thinks he knows how to farm
U
Oh sorry, here is the picture
(deleted this and reposted it because I realized the real estate agents name and picture was on the screencap, and IDK even though it's sort of a benign discussion I wouldn't want anyone posting my photo on this god forsaken site)
>Nobody can own the Earth, and it's wrong to think you do. "Private property" is theft
Why? On what basis?
>I just want a simple, growable 2.5 acre patch of land wherein I can do wherein I can grow and sustainably create everything I need to survive
This is a private prorperty you moron
user I think you know that you shouldn't be defending what you're defending. Lol even the real estate listing is like "Uh, yeah, you can't really live here, but IDK some people do". Most people can't live at 7000 ft user. You know that. You need to be real. If we're at the point where conservatives are saying "Dude just go pull yourselves up by your bootstrap and live at 7000 ft elevation, don't worry about the thin air, the BILLIONAIRES need all of the good air" then we've got real problems. That's an indefensible tac for you to take
Go back to r*ddit
>The fact that you have prevented me from doing this through your oppressive "monetary system" makes you evil
Who's "you"? Because Im pretty sure its the State that prohibits you from owning land or any non inflationary currency smoothbrain
When you talk about how much land we could all have if it was divided equally, that implies you either want to do that, or find it just, or at least somehow relevant.
>he was in fact sort-of talking about dividing land equally, to some degree. De-facto.
That's a really long way to say that it wasn't what he was talking about at all.
>Are you suggesting the govt seize absentee property?
No, absentee property should be subject to individual claims. The government shouldn't just own land, unless for a specific legitimate purpose of the state. Unowned land should be owned by nobody until a claim is made.
As far as the rest of what you said, you are flying off into lala land again. Locke is infinitely more right wing then our country is today. Just looking about property norms: The official property lines are enforced by the state. How you can subdivide your land is regulated by the state. Easements are regulated by the state. Virtually everyone pays property taxes. (See: Rent) Virtually everyone is regulated by the state what they can do and/or build on their property. Many local governments enforce laws stating how long your fucking grass can be or where you can park vehicles. Almost everything concerning land ownership is somehow controlled by the state. That's not Lockean at all, nor is it in line with small limited government. If your argument is that it's not liberal big government but fascist big government making all these laws, I'll just have to disagree. Almost all of these laws are justified by the invisible undetectable "Jehova" I'm sorry I mean "Social Contract" Nobody says these laws are enforced in the interest of our race or nation or anything like that.
It's private property if the system refuses to abolish private property. There are only 2 moral choices, 1) abolish private property or 2) create a system that is more fair and equitable for everyone, allowing them an option of living life naturally and sustainably and independently. Anything else is slavery. Forcing people into compulsory participation in the monetary system is slavery. These two things you point out are not at all mutually contradictive
Based. Everybody deserves to live on the soil God gave us
>Our country has moved SUPER far to the right
Please shut the fuck up statist scum
n 1910, the physician oligopoly was started during the Republican administration of William Taft after the American Medical Association lobbied the states to strengthen the regulation of medical licensure and allow their state AMA offices to oversee the closure or merger of nearly half of medical schools and also the reduction of class sizes. The states have been subsidizing the education of the number of doctors recommended by the AMA.
In 1925, prescription drug monopolies begun after the federal government led by Republican President Calvin Coolidge started allowing the patenting of drugs. (Drug monopolies have also been promoted by government research and development subsidies targeted to favored pharmaceutical companies.)
In 1945, buyer monopolization begun after the McCarran-Ferguson Act led by the Roosevelt Administration exempted the business of medical insurance from most federal regulation, including antitrust laws. (States have also more recently contributed to the monopolization by requiring health care plans to meet standards for coverage.)
In 1946, institutional provider monopolization begun after favored hospitals received federal subsidies (matching grants and loans) provided under the Hospital Survey and Construction Act passed during the Truman Administration. (States have also been exempting non-profit hospitals from antitrust laws.)
In 1951, employers started to become the dominant third-party insurance buyer during the Truman Administration after the Internal Revenue Service declared group premiums tax-deductible.
In 1965, nationalization was started with a government buyer monopoly after the Johnson Administration led passage of Medicare and Medicaid which provided health insurance for the elderly and poor, respectively.
Power is a mile away. The cost to bring electricity to that area, and then clean water, and septic. You'll spend 500,000 more.
I just want a gf and to have kids. If anyone here is from the illuminati can you make me rich and status long enough for me to impress a girl and long enough for her to give birth so that way she cant change her mind then you can have everything all back and ill go live in the woods alone happy knowing i passed on my genes
Go get your free non private property in slab city. Enjoy your 130 degree summers. You're welcome.
I think you're just a stupid nigger looking for a hand out
We both know that you haven't worked a day in your life
Your argument is bunk due to the fact people live at even higher elevations
Please proceed to anhero before your father realizes he has raised a worthless sack of skin
>It's private property if the system refuses to abolish private property
This still doesnt say why private property is wrong
> Forcing people into compulsory participation in the monetary system is slavery
Which is what the State does by frocing people to use the official currency, this is THE OPPOSITE of private property as the State is ANTI-private property (because the individual owns himself, he is the first private property, the State makes you its slave by saying you need to pay taxes, meaning he says you dont own yourself, which goes against private property)
Hippy retard kys to reduce your carbon footprint
Based hoppe lover, based managedmarketviewer, based jewishlandlaws, based
Solar
Water tanks
Septic isn't hard
Stop acting like homesteading is easy
Wait I forgot this is the current year and life is supposed be to lived on easy mode
I own 75 acres, please try and take it or live on my land. KYS
1) Yes Jefferson was talking about dividing land equally. De-facto. Did you even read the thing I posted? Jesus, you people are hard to deal with sometimes.
2) I never said I wanted to redistribute land equally. IDK why you'd say that. This is something you just made up in your head and now you're doubling down on it, sort of, it seems?
In terms of the rest of your post. You know what user, I don't care if you call it "right-wing" or "left-wing", and I don't have any beef with people like you. Meh, I actually voted for Ron Paul back in 2012, honestly, so you know I don't think people who are genuine about the ideas you profess are "bad people". But what I would say is that in practical terms, people like you USUALLY end up voting Republican, or supporting the right-wing, and in the end the right-wing is actually extremely unsympathetic to your views. Look what they did to Ron Paul. His own party destroyed him, and he didn't even really have much support to begin with among Republican voters. I mean, at least Bernie Sanders manages to command almost half the Democrat party. So I dunno. I respect the intellectual congruence in your views, but I would caution you 2 things. 1) your belief in small government is going to be manipulated by Republicans to get you to vote for supporting MASSIVE government measures and a tyrannical economic system and 2) also in practical terms, if you went around espousing the sort of ideas you're espousing at something like, for example, CPAC, they would fucking run you out of the building, shouting that you're a "COMMIE!" and so forth, and they'd have just as much hatred for you as they'd have for someone like me. Maybe even more, I dunno.
And I know you didn't explicitly claim to be a Republican. So I'm not trying to put words in your mouth. I'm just saying, you do seem to be professing some kind of allegiance or supposed ideological sympathy for the right-wing here, and so I'm just saying maybe potentially reconsider that
Based homesteader
>create a system that is more fair and equitable for everyone, allowing them an option of living life naturally and sustainably and independently
The problem is that you want a "right" of land, which can only be made if a State slaves others to make sure this happens
You cant really determine how fair a system is because you would need to define profit, whcih is highly subjective, the only system that can distribute wealth and make human llife better is voluntary free market
Get lost commie
Peel your dick like a banana, and everything will be yours
I'm going to keep this brief because from reading your posts I am like 90% you are trolling, but I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and treat this like a serious argument rather than the laughably easy strawman you're making.
Private property is quite literally the only thing ensuring that people don't start murdering each other over land in the near future. Keep in mind that virtually every single native American tribe did not believe in "private property" and as a result were in constant warfare with each other for... well as long as we've known them. The basis for any civil society is in the setting of boundaries, whether it be physical, ethical, or otherwise. And believe me, the irony of you stating something can be "moral" when your entire argument is based on the premise of boundaries not existing is not lost on me.
>and "the economic system"
How to you plan on acquiring tools to work on your land?
This is just kind of cherry-picked factoids wrenched from context. Not all that relevant in terms of the big picture. Some of your examples even pre-date FDR, which would make them pretty irrelevant to this topic. Basically from the postwar period up until Reagan, the USA used keynesian economics and extremely left-wing policies that lowered wealth inequality, fostered wage growth (up until Nixon on that one, anyway) and provided for what we now think of as "the golden age" of the USA. Infamously, we had a 91% top marginal tax rate, a 50% EFFECTIVE corporate tax rate (meaning that's what our corporations actually PAID). I mean, IDK what this cherry-picking nonsense is you're doing. Any economist of American historian will tell you that the USA was way farther to the left economically during the mid-20th century than it is now
Where do you want your 2.5 acres? In a nice warm comfy west coast climate area or a nigger infested east coats concrete jungle? Be more specific fucking parasite.
>all land is the same
Listen you nigger,
Libertarianism/ancap is literally consistent even throughout infinite multiverses and space.
It is also the only alpha and omega in that it allows and encourages communal organization, as long as it respects the private property of the individual.
Say science comes out and says we’re all one consciousness. Individual liberty is even more consistent in that it’s the most beneficial and most peaceful, as we see today, most of the perversion comes or is enabled by the state. NAP is better then the concept of the state in totality. Even if we are all one, that would even more harshly justify self defence against bad actors as they aren’t acting in a manner that advances the rest of “us” as force and cohersion outside of self defence (and pre emptive self defence) is wrong.
If ayyylamos came down tommorow and they had no concept of death and still had duality, they would be the dumbest niggers in the multiverse.
So in every angle possible liberty maximization is correct
You're right, but for me I don't even care about that. I'd be happy with the stuff that mentions. And unlike him I think it's pretty easy. You can build wind turbines that will generate good amounts of electricity out of literal trash you find on the side of the road. I think the greatest injustice of our current system is just that it keeps us off the LAND unless we pay some ransom to the state or a private property land baron. Then the Republicans get in office and pass "vagrancy laws" so that basically your entire existence is "illegal" unless you're paying rent on Earth. The fucking nerve for these GodCuck assholes to tell you that you need to pay RENT on Earth as if "they own it" when IRL they fucking don't. They're just delusional, psychopathic, weak little bug-eyed men with small dicks and the only way they get off is by trying to control and enslave the rest of humanity
Yeah, how about you go live in a jungle if you like trees so much, eh commie hippy?
>Growing your own food, creating a sustainable ecosystem that benefits the Earth and doesn't rape the Earth with fossil fuel emissions or capitalist pollution is a handout.
>Consooming and consooming with paper dollars given to you for your willingness to slave for a metaphysically dark system that murders innocents by dropping bombs on them overseas and is literally raping all of our futures is not a handout
This is the metaphysical inversion of values that our conservatives and horrible, horrible, horrible capitalist Republicans try to sell us and enslave us with. It is completely backwards.
>I think it's easy
>hasn't even done it because no job
>give me land reeee
>has no money for land
>somehow has money for wind turbine
The mental gymnastics of this faggot
Dude I can make fucking pretty much literally ANYTHING from the land. You'd be amazed. I'm awesome at that stuff. It's pretty easy, I mean literal cavemen did it.
Come to my borders and demand to enter because "there is no private property"
See what happens
I'm waiting op's replay to this
Shut the fuck up nigger you have no idea what youre talking about, the US was relying on industry innovation and giving free credit to people
Why do you think wages are raised to 1 million dollars jackass? Wealth inequality?Inequality of wealth and incomes is an essential feature of the market economy. It is the implement that makes the consumers supreme in giving them the power to force all those engaged in production to comply with their orders. It forces all those engaged in production to the utmost exertion in the service of the consumers. It makes competition work. He who best serves the consumers profits most and accumulates riches.
I make the windturbines out of trash I find on the side of the road though. I don't pay for them. I don't pay for much of anything man, I do pretty much everything sustainably in my life, you'd be amazed some of the things I've accomplished.
>I need acres to grow food
>doesn't understand crop rotation or seasons
>most likely doesn't understand why farmers burn fields
Can you kill yourself already, you're more annoying than you're whore mom on the second date with your father when she wouldn't stop talking about her ex boyfriend
Theres land like that all over the rocky mountain region and the southwest for significantly cheaper then this listing. I've seen 40 acre plots got for under $10k. Thing is, its mostly useless. Theres no water, no shade, no infrastructure of any kind and you're miles from anywhere. Other then cooking meth or use as a junkyard this land has no value. You'll never grow anything without water and soil amendments and lots of plants won't grow in that much sun, they dry out.
Theres better deals out there and owner financing is available for most of it. Put down $5k and pay $400/mo for 3-5 years and you own it. If you can't do that you weren't going to make it anyways.
try landsofamerica.com
>It's pretty easy, I mean literal cavemen did it.
I can tell you never even make fire in your life and are a neet that idealizes nature
So let me get this straight, you're gonna build a wind turbine out of trash...but you want 2.5 acres...I doubt you're going to be able to farm that land by yourself, so you're going to need a machine or animal.
That takes fuel or food. But you have no fuel because you have no job and you have no food because you haven't grown anything, instead you foraged for trash on the side of a dirt road for 2 weeks to build a piss poor turbine that cant catch any wind under 15mph.
Nigger you're already dead
i mean even the desert is capable of supporting crops and animals. its pefectly fine land.
I claim Earth in the name of the Aryan nation.
go cry in the corner OP
Nigger capitalism is jist a system where individuals can trade things using a currency, all your posts are a strawman when youre really speaking against the State
Oh yeah, I don't deny the point you're making at all. So you know what we should do, in practical terms? Would level all of the northern cities and relocate them to the desert, where the land isn't very useful anyway. Have all the industry, all of the "concrete jungle" there. Then tax the shit out of people who own over a certain amount of acreage (to be determined) so that they give it up and sell for cheap. Then suddenly land will be cheap and available to everyone. And we can all focus on living sustainably. And there will be tons of new land available without all of the concrete eyesores dotting our coastlines and inland landscapes.
Actually, I say we just say "fuck it" to even relocating those cities to the desert, because we don't actually need those cities for anything. They are evil and they are abominations, and mostly the people in them are evil and are abominations.
I love it, I'll take it
Find wash, build dam in dry season, hunt donkeys and mule deer.
Rain comes, dam breaks and no more water
Dead
OP has never even planteda potatoe let alone be able to turn land into something useful
I dont doubt OP is a woman (in which case post tits op)
He's the kind of guy who goes on Naked & Afraid, talks up all his primitive survival skills, then quits on Day 3.
Keep your kind out of my beloved desert
I can generate 400 watts out of a single trash-turbine. Lol. IDK what you're talking about. There is nothing shitty about that at all. That is 100% goodness. And I can find trash on the side of the road all over, and if you gave me enough time lol I could prob solve the world's energy needs with just that. Problem is that our energy situation isn't based in necessity, it's based in capitalist corruption.
Then why is it empty?
>"Private property" is theft
>I want a 2.5 acre patch of land
So you're saying that you're retarded. Got it.
>Then tax the shit out of people who own over a certain amount of acreage (to be determined)
OR, what acutally happens in reality, they raise prices on whatever they sell and the government prints more more to compensate for inflation, creating more inflation
>Then suddenly land will be cheap and available to everyone
With what money, exactly, will people buy it?
>because we don't actually need those cities for anything. They are evil and they are abominations
Do you really know why cities exist? Tip is has to do with industries, look up how industries led to better conditions of life
Kek
You've had probably 20 years on this earth and you haven't solved the world's problem
Post pic of trash turbine or you're a nigger.
I bet you think nuclear power is bad too dont you?
Ugh no. I can't explain this again. Go read through the comments of the 100 other people who replied in this exact same way and see how I replied to them. There's nothing contradictory about it once you truly understand the point being made
That's just a story we tell you mild climates, we dont want you here
>I can generate 400 watts out of a single trash-turbine
Provide us the schematics of said turbine and how you would actually make each part of the turbine as eolic turbines require INDUTRIES to make them
You wouldn't know "practicality" if it slapped you upside the head, which is why you're preaching retarded communist fantasies.
Neither do you have any clue of what sustainability even means.
Here's the reality: you're a weak faggot who can't compete. So you want government to rob your betters and give it to you.
>With what money, exactly, will people buy it?
There will still be money from local economy. Just not as much of it, and we won't need as much of it, because we'll actually be producing and sustaining and living naturally, and doing good things.
>OR, what acutally happens in reality, they raise prices on whatever they sell and the government prints more more to compensate for inflation, creating more inflation
No land would become an extremely cheap commodity is all that would happen. People would sell their excess land and absentee properties in order to avoid the excessive taxes, and then through supply and demand land would become cheap and plentifully available. And then millennials and zoomers don't have to daydream of death in order to escape their own economic enslavement anymore. And then people can be free. There is literally nothing bad about this system. I don't want to be too mean but you people are just evil for not supporting it.
>I can generate 400 watts out of a single trash-turbine. Lol. IDK what you're talking about. There is nothing shitty about that at all. That is 100% goodness. And I can find trash on the side of the road all over, and if you gave me enough time lol I could prob solve the world's energy needs with just that. Problem is that our energy situation isn't based in necessity, it's based in capitalist corruption.
Actually if you can make such high efficient turbines with basically trash, you should gain a huge profit margin on the market, yet youre whining about capitalism, why is that?
>There's nothing contradictory about it once you truly understand the point being made
The point you made is that you dont understand what private property means
>moves to a sun parched patch of land
>thinks trash wind turbines are better then solar
I don't think you would make it even if someone gave you the land for free
user I'm not gonna post any pics, but listen it's very easy. I will explain it to you if you want to do it. You find some old appliance on the side of the road with a motor. You take that motor. You take it apart. You affix some magnets to the inside of the motor to move the electrons. You spin the motor. Now instead of TAKING electricity to spin it PRODUCES electricity when you spin it. This is known as a G _ E _ N _ O _ R _ A _ T _ O _ R, LOL. It is not exactly rocket science.
Have you tried not being a loser with no money?
Kek
Slab city
Wow ITT people who don't know the first thing about generating electricity. Dude you just find an old appliance with a motor in it and reverse the flow of electrons so it becomes a generator. 100% basic simple stuff.
Hippity Hoppity stay off my property
>private property is theft
>so let's demolish millions of people's homes and force them to move out into the desert
user anyone can do it, and many people do do it. It's not something I invented. It's just basic green energy. They're not used commercially only because of the corruption of the fossile fuel industry, govt subsidies, cronyism ect. It's not some magical high-tech design I'm sitting on, it's just electronics 101.
OK I was being a little facetious. Sorry nazi.