The Free Land Act of 2011

All we need is free land.

There are 2,260,994,361 acres of land in the United States.
There are 922,095,840 acres of farmland in the United States.
There are 308,745,538 people in the United States.
That's enough land so that every person in the United States has about 3 acres of farmland.
That's 130,680 square feet of farmland per person. (plus 188901 sq. ft. of "other" land)

With that much land, we could all plant huge gardens and own some livestock. We would never need to go to a grocery store again. Good bye Wal-Mart!

Chop down some trees and build a house. If you don't have that many trees, I'll give you any extra I have. If you don't know how to build a house, I'll help you. Good bye Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac!

The average mortgage payment in the US is around $20,244 per year. The average American spends about $2,078 on food per year. That's $22,322 per year that could be saved if the government had the humanity to allow us the basic human right to reside on free land.

These are just basic needs. Sure we might not be able to fully get rid of currency all together at this early stage of human development, and become fully self-sufficient while satisfying all of our wants and needs, but if we just had free land, the economy might not be our enemy any more. We are part of this Earth, and what is part of the Earth belongs to the people, not greedy corporations. We should be entitled to what is rightfully ours without being at the mercy of those who want to make a profit.







www.ers.usda.gov...
en.wikipedia.org...
answers.google.com...

I like my parks thank you very much.

While I like the idea(S&F), it would never work. Some people are just too damned lazy to actually "work" for a living. If you do get it passed, let me know. I would happily take my 3 acres and become as self sufficient as humanly possible.

reply to post by smithjustinb


The government doesn't want you or anyone else to be self reliant. They want you spending money at walmart and the grocery store, they want you dependent on the system. The government depends on the tax revenue.

We don't have the freedom or liberty to live this way. Just ask any Native American

reply to post by smithjustinb


If anything you are taking a HUGE step backwards rather than forwards. What happens to all our national parks? What do we do about the mountainous regions that arent suitable for living? Nevermind the fact that your 'plan' sounds eerily similar to how the country was run 100-200 years ago (forgive me, history is not my strong point 1850s-early 1900s?).

I am not usually very proactive, but if I ever saw this bill even being considered I would fight it tooth and nail as I am sure many other people would also. This is a completely naive solution that would only compound the problems with society.

reply to post by smithjustinb


laws and regulations on human rights,a clear violation of creation.next?carbon tax,air is also basic need like land and food.let another human control your basic needs and you have a god above you.or is it not the same power said to be of a god?so we appoint humans as gods above us,and they control our basic needs and we even die for there needs,and we have faith in them to save us from harm.social idea is lost once it grows to certain level and becomes something else.a god like figure and no one is to say if that god is good or evil but the actions speak louder then words.

Originally posted by Segador
I like my parks thank you very much.

Our tax subsidies have also been responsible for the extermination of wildlife, sometimes to the point of near extinction. While state governments were encouraging the shooting of hawks (Pennsylvania paid hunters a bounty), Mrs. Rosalie Edge began a sanctuary for them with voluntary contributions. She bought what is now known as Hawk Mountain, an eastern Pennsylvania area of the Appalachians that was ideally suited to bird watching. Before she established the Hawk Mountain Sanctuary in 1934, sportsmen had used it to shoot the magnificent birds. (25)

Healing Our World in an Age of Agression
I believe all government land should be returned to the people. Private ownership is a far more effective incentive for conservation.

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
While I like the idea(S&F), it would never work. Some people are just too damned lazy to actually "work" for a living. If you do get it passed, let me know. I would happily take my 3 acres and become as self sufficient as humanly possible.

For 3 acres I'd help pick up the slack for the lazy ones lol. There was a book out (that I'm wracking my brain to try and remember, I just remember it was a scifi), where the planet that they were on had a 'prosperity for everyone' mindset. The only people that went to work were the ones that wanted to. All of your basic needs like food, shelter, basic clothing, and medical were provided for. Everyone was alloted something like $700 per month to do whatever with. One of the main characters was blown away by how relaxed and advanced everyone was (he came from earth where everyone was me me me). He even asked How does everyone have so much? And the answer was that believe it or not, there are people that LIKE retail, server jobs, doctors, nurse, artist, actor, reporter, maid, etc (even here there are). She said, when you give people the choice to be whatever they want (even a lazy bum ). That it brings out the best in everyone, because they are not stressed and not overworked and WAY more productive and creative. Ahhh if only we could have something like this, I could see the human race becoming something great! Awesome post OP, even if people decided to stay in cities, we could all benefit from something like this.

I agree, and I believe this sort of idea will become the ideal situation.....if we can ever get past the stigma of socialism that is attached to this idea.

We will have to take on more personal responsibility which will also be accompanied by social and community responsibility. Neighbors helping neighbors throughout the good and bad times, creating a system in which service to others is as honorable as service to self (IE: creating personal wealth).

Trade would still ensure through the specialized skills we all would acquire when we have time to concentrate on our talents, instead of a 9 to 5 that takes 1/3rd of our lives away.

Unfortunately, I do not see that coming to fruition within our lifetime. We are stuck, stuck bad. I don't know what will get us out of this rut.

What about sasquatch?The sasquatch population deserves some land too.

Originally posted by IntegratedInstigator
reply to post by smithjustinb

 

If anything you are taking a HUGE step backwards rather than forwards. What happens to all our national parks? What do we do about the mountainous regions that arent suitable for living? Nevermind the fact that your 'plan' sounds eerily similar to how the country was run 100-200 years ago (forgive me, history is not my strong point 1850s-early 1900s?).

I am not usually very proactive, but if I ever saw this bill even being considered I would fight it tooth and nail as I am sure many other people would also. This is a completely naive solution that would only compound the problems with society.

edit on 19-6-2011 by IntegratedInstigator because: (no reason given)

This plan is, of course, a rough draft. There would have to be many other tweaks to the system to get this to work, but once it did, I believe the quality of life for all the people in this nation would improve significantly.

It does seem like taking a step back, but I honestly think we should have never taken the step "forward".

Some people like living in the mountains. Perhaps the mountains could become new wildlife preserves.

I'm sure there are plenty of ways that this could work out smoothly enough.

You say you would fight it? How could you not like the idea of free land? You must have a disposable income and over 3 acres of land already.

I'm not even saying that the government has to step in and regulate exactly 3 acres of land. I'm saying if you want to build a house one foot away from someone else's or a mile away, that should be your choice. Of course you might have to answer to the person who you're building the house next to.

Originally posted by sheepslayer247


Unfortunately, I do not see that coming to fruition within our lifetime. We are stuck, stuck bad. I don't know what will get us out of this rut.

Divine and/or E.T. intervention. Hopefully.

reply to post by smithjustinb
early stage of human development?i think not,many civilizations before us existed and reached the peak and vanished like perhaps will follow with us if we continue on the same mistakes.looking back and learning would be wise,one thing common to all that vanish is,they grew big and powerful.that is one thing common of them that stands out.

Originally posted by LDragonFire
reply to post by smithjustinb

 

The government doesn't want you or anyone else to be self reliant. They want you spending money at walmart and the grocery store, they want you dependent on the system. The government depends on the tax revenue.

We don't have the freedom or liberty to live this way. Just ask any Native American

edit on 19-6-2011 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)

Quite right. When enough people start growing their own food,and not buying it from the market. The government will try to pass a garden tax,because of the lost sales tax revenue. They have to keep us trapped in their web. Governments live off the stress of the people.

How about wild horses,bison...How much land did you factor in your equation for them?

Originally posted by bumpufirst
reply to post by smithjustinb

 

early stage of human development?i think not,many civilizations before us existed and reached the peak and vanished like perhaps will follow with us if we continue on the same mistakes.looking back and learning would be wise,one thing common to all that vanish is,they grew big and powerful.that is one thing common of them that stands out.

Not early stage of civilization development, early stage of human development. At a higher stage of human development, I expect everyone would be capable of becoming fully self-sufficient w/o the need of regulatory systems such as government. I'm saying we would be so advanced that our agendas would be way more significant than that of any government. As truly sovereign individuals, we would be able to accomplish more than we would under the control of government regulations. I think that's what a full developed human would be like.

reply to post by smithjustinb

Are you proposing that the government confiscate land from the people that own it and hand it out to everybody else? That sounds very socialist to me.

reply to post by sheepslayer247

i agree with you,that is how it was in the old days and look how far it took us.gives every one a sense of value in the community,and desire to belong.now the government and major corporations take care of all that for the people.rendering most of talents useless in a giving community.killing the minds need to create and adapt.

reply to post by smithjustinb


I'll keep my capitalism and free market thanks.