Nobody should be allowed to own more than 10 acres of land...

I'm not talking about the state doling out plots of land, or redistributing wealth. I'm not talking about abolishing the economic system, or the concept of private property. I'm not talking about changing out system that drastically. I'm just talking about a simple change that would solve very many of our problems and make the Earth and its fruits greatly more accessible to the masses and to the people. And it would do so without statist authoritarianism. It's a great solution because it actually objectively involves far LESS statism and far LESS authoritarianism. It's actually explicitly the ABOLITION of excess authority.

Well if you're talking historically, here in the USA at least that certainly was not the agenda of someone like Thomas Jefferson. Many of our forefathers were pretty much proto-leftists. Pic related.

Anyway, in more contemporary terms, of course that's partly true. But IDK why you're calling me a retard because I'm talking about making a change that would fix that fundamental flaw with capitalism, and do so without the authoritarianism that hands off so much power (which is frightening, compulsory power) to the state.

Attached: based jefferson.png (760x747, 121.83K)

There needs to be a balance of open land that no one owns and is protected, public commons that is shared or anyone has access, and private land.

What that balance is exactly should be worked out by everyone who cares, guided by facts. The current balance is obviously off because at a minimum people born in families at or below replacement rate of about 2 aren't guaranteed land rights.
Fuck slavery.

>Less than 5 acres is all that's needed to be 100% self-sufficient

Attached: 1557489542529.jpg (280x280, 11.6K)

To be self sustained with foresting for lumber production you'd need a lot more.
If you're going to be self sustained (full time job) with food production you'd need a lot more
OP has never been outside the city and worked.
Besides, who'd in their right mind would buy farm equipment like tractors for a small place like that? With enough land a farmer can get on a tractor and harvest huge amounts of food that will benefit city dwellers like OP

I don't fucking want to be self sufficient though. I want to buy food from farmers. That requires farmers to be able to own relatively large plots of land.

Think they already tried that in Rhodesia how did that work out.

fpbp OP is a faggot

Totally untrue. You guys have no clue. You're thinking "self-sustainable" in terms of a big business, with lots of overhead, and tons of employees (slaves). This is because someone like you can't do anything for yourself. This is a system that is good because it fosters true self-sufficiency. Conservatives like to TALK about "personal responsibility" and stuff like that, but then once you get to talking about deconstructing the violent and authoritarian societal tools they use to oppress the masses and keep them as "employees" then all of the sudden the old men start shitting their pants

In practice, this would just switch to local economy. You'd just get more local produce. IRL though the system is good because it will foster self-sufficiency in you. Without self-sufficiency, you honestly are just a slave. You don't be a slave, bro. But technically speaking under this system you still could be, you'd just get more fresh, organically grown local produce / product

Too late.
Also, fuck off.

There’s a lot of people in the world that do not deserve land. And then half the people that do deserve it wouldn’t know what to do with it. And some of the people that don’t deserve the land grow most of our food. Also you can own like 10 acres of land in NYC and make millions while 10 acres in Siberia wouldn’t give you shit. All in all you are one stupid mofo. Grow the fuck up

You want more than 10 acres, Buy it.
Problem solved.

this is a shill thread
the elites want to abolish private property (except for them of course)

I should be able to own enough land so that the curvature of the earth hides the rest of you mongs from my line of sight.

>I don't fucking want to be self sufficient
Fucking this. My ancestors worked so my life could be easier than their's.

S M H, it's hard to think that people go through their whole lives actually believing stuff like this, which is the polar opposite of actual reality. "Private property" as we know it is a system of tyrannical authoritarianism that is perpetuated and ardently defended by the elites. It's literally the only thing that keeps them in power and keeps them "elite" along with statism in general

lol. I've got a full time job to support myself even with my 40 acres. I don't have any employees for my land as that'd be financial suicide.

>not elite
>own 12 acres
You don't think I should be able to have private property?
Eat my shit.

Your ancestors probably worked between 10-15 hours a week. Even under feudalism you had huge stretches of historical periods where serfs only worked 1 or 2 days a week. If you think you've got a better life now than your self-sufficient ancestors did, you've got another thing coming. And that's not to defend feudalism or any of the laws that existed back then, but those governments were hampered in carrying out most of their authoritarianism by 1) a lack of globalized technology like we have today and 2) everything being much more spread out with a lower population density

I think you should be able to have private property, you're just going to have to choose 2 acres there to axe off, bub. Hahaha sorry.

Go fuck your mother after I'm done with her.

FWIW in my view you should not be taxed for the 10 acres that you do have. So I guess you'd at least get that out of the deal. Land taxes, IMO, are the most insidious things in the world. But private holdings of land should never exceed 10 acres.

the price of land if you move to a rural place is already very low. Just compare it to small city apartments.
The problem is that most city dwellers have no awareness of this, and if they do they're scared shitless leaving the city. As they fully know they have no idea where to even start making a land profitable

>youtube.com/watch?v=Dkk9gvTmCXY

No gives a fuck about your opinion, faggot.

Why 10 specifically? Where did you come up with that number and how?

That's not really true. 1) it depends on your definition of "low" and 2) I mean there is cheap undesirable land, yeah. But it might be at like 8000 ft elevation and when you get up there you just drop dead and die cuz your body can't hack it. You know. Or some other issue.

I'm not talking about land redistribution or the state divvying land up or anything, keep in mind, I'm just talking about the state not protecting excesses of 10 acres with its monopoly on violence. So it's still private property. It's still bought and sold in an economy. There are still technically winners and losers. It's just a far more equitable and less authoritarian system that objectively makes the Earth far more accessible to most of humanity.

Not all land is equal you fuck wit. 10 acres in death valley is worthless compared to 10 acres of woodland in Montana. Kys you fucking faggot

Because 5 is a high end estimate of what a person needs to be truly self-sufficient. TRULY self-sufficient. As in total independence from the economic system. I doubled that because you know, not all land is equal and maybe people can have a bit more. Whatever. 20, I think, would just be too much because at that point it would stop solving other social issues, like corporate monopolies, absentee properties, land hogs, ect

Also there's about 8 acres of land in this country per person. Not per family, not per adult, but just per person. So that figured into my decision to settle on 10 acres, too. 10 acres is what I believe

He that's funny I just said exactly that same phrase right here . Yeah that's true, not all land is equal. But not everyone would have 10 acres. Not everyone would be farming. Not everyone would be choosing to live a self-sufficient lifestyle because humans are very social creatures. So you know, nature can still take its course and human society can still be mostly what it is, it will just be that the Earth and the economy is more opened up to poor and lower class people. To ordinary people. To people who want to start a business. And economy will be more on a local scale, with independently owned shops and businesses, rather than corporatocracy and a handful of ruling oligarch "masters of the universe" that hide behind the state, and pay the state off to protect their massive holdings and vast private empires

How many acres do you currently own?

You can grow all the food you would ever need on a quarter acre. So why not put that as the maximum?

you're just not willing to move to a place where you'll have to work
landwatch.com/Humboldt-County-Nevada-Farms-and-Ranches-for-sale/pid/333696873

>640 acres
>100 USD

Attached: land.png (517x243, 187.03K)

If my wife divorces me take a wild guess where imma end up lol.

This

Attached: dVYBDvPIJ.jpg (307x302, 37.72K)

Fuck you nigger
T. rancher

ahoy me matey
even if your rule was real, you still wouldnt own jack shit
so fuck off and go beat some fucking trashcans you commie faggot dog

>Nobody should be allowed to own more than 10 acres of land. Less than 5 acres is all that's needed to be 100% self-sufficient.
Hume's guilliotine
Either way it all comes down to socialis scum like you not understanding that value is subjective and that only the market can allocate resources efficiently (including land, there has been periods in american history with a land free market)

Nah lol you're not gonna get 640 acres for 100 bucks guys. You're not gonna get anything for 100 bucks. I can find you 1000 listings like that all over the internet, then you call up and the price they put to it is just BS. I mean, I can find you ads that say "100 acres for 1$" it's just pure fiction, and there's no shortage of these ads, they're all over the internet.

And I think we all know real life is nobody is selling 640 acres for 100 bucks. You're just being really stupid right now. If you're going to continue to double down on that being real, that is

>the prices of land would plummet
No you idiot, the acre would skyrocket as you're only allowed to have 10 per person, it's an artificially low supply
Fucking morons ,why do you never study basic austrian economics before farting through posts?

>Totally untrue. You guys have no clue. You're thinking "self-sustainable" in terms of a big business, with lots of overhead, and tons of employees (slaves).
More like having an average salary from that land without any employees. Just try that. You have to produce way more then just for yourself in order to sell produce.
As a small provider your costs will also be high, due to not being able to load a full truck. So your profits will be even worse because your small because the shipping fee increase, and the deals you can make with a seller are worse too. You can't buy great equipment, and the costs for fertilizer etc is also way higher as you cannot buy it in bulk.
But if your land is big enough you might be able to lend up to get better equipment that'll enable you to produce more without needing to employ anyone.
Although a team is always more productive then one individual...

Also, people would start having more children to get more land, acres would start to become even more expensive and as your retarded communist ideal says every person has the "right" to land, eventually people would be able to have 1 acre or less

Youre a faggot. Theres literally no piint to less than 30 acres. How the fuck am I supposed to hunt 10 acres? How do I ensure even halfway decent control of bodies of water on my property if most of the water is off my property? Am I only allowed one structure for a housr then a barn or shed? I dont think you even know what self sufficient means. Fuck you retard.

Attached: 6A12E9E5-8FF5-4E30-A821-7DB61E4DD9B0.jpg (728x594, 36.59K)

just go and see the apartment prices in New York or any other of your cities and compare it to rural land property prices.
Small apartments cost waaaay more then the 5 acres of land that you need.
Just buy a 1000 acre piece of land for 200'000 and split it with 200 people. Then you'll only have to pay 1000 USD each and have that 5 acre property. Maybe you can even have a community that cooperates

I mean here, just an example. Do you think is really 1$ for 404 acres? Obviously not.

I mean I know you're not even from this country, Norway user, so maybe you genuinely don't know. But no, you can't even come close to getting land for 100 buck around here. At all. Anywhere, lol. I'm surprised that even a foreigner would have unironically thought that was possible

Attached: Screen Shot 2020-04-05 at 3.11.57 AM.png (1681x964, 1.82M)

Actually OP's mental fart reminds me of the housing bubble of 2008, it's the exact same concept of the laws that created the recession

No. Not even remotely. WTF lol. Brazil

make sure my 10 acres include clean natural groundwater within 50' of the ground surface. Must also be relatively flat, with good soil for growing crops. Must also be wooded with dense trees. Also must be at a latitude with temperate climate, non-tropical, non-desert, non-arctic.

zillow.com/ny/condos/
landwatch.com/default.aspx?ct=r&type=13,338;92,483&r.PRIC=,489999
you're going to buy an apartment or a piece of land anyway, right?
The price for land don't seem to bad to be honest

Land you find for sale on landwatch and those other sites is basically false advertised though, dude. And in other cases there can be restrictions on whether or not you're actually allowed to live on it. That's extremely common. Also on landwatch you find a bunch of "land for sale" up there and then you call up and find that the only thing they're actually selling is maybe mineral rights or whatever, and the reason it's so cheap is because there's no proven minerals there on that land, so it's basically a scam.

IDK dude take it from me, trust me, there is no cheap land in the USA. Not really. Not like you're postulating.

Stuff you find on Zillow is a bit better, but there's still a lot of bullshit with the listing agents, and not doing full disclosure. Or just outright falsely advertising the price in order to drive interest or sometimes create a bidding war.