Why are Feds taking Land and its Precious Resources off the market?

More importantly, why are we letting them? answer: non-integrated thinking as a result of years of HyperEduFlation.


And most importantly how much does this non-integrated thinking cost us?

HERE IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE:

In our real world the federal and state government own over half the US land mass. And they're taking more!!It doesn't take an economist to figure holding that much of ANYTHING that is useful off the market drives the price of what is left THROUGH THE ROOF!

Can you imagine how inexpensive land, and the resources it offers, would be if it weren't corralled by the State? And what would happen to the national debt if this idle abomination were sold on the open market with the proceeds going to ending the prospects of slavery for future generations?

There's a favorite saying that hasn't been applied here, for the same reasons we have this absurdity in the first place:

"FOLLOW THE MONEY."

Let's do that! Let's ask WHO would be the biggest beneficiaries from the horrific kind of land and resource policies currently being enforced? Before answering, also consider that this practice is one of the cruelest taxes on the the most vulnerable---the so-called 'little guys' whose interests their self-decribed protectors would have us believe they have foremost in their mind! We are talking about one of the most insidious and regressive forms of taxation ever devised...

Conversely, who would be the 'losers' if the obscenely artificially high prices were to settle at half their current levels? It's easy:

The 'losers' would be those currently holding title, to the articially high-priced PRIVATE land and it's contents. Who are they, largely? Moneylenders, particularly large banks and financial institutions (See Lysander Spooner's NO TREASON: THE CONSTITUTION of NO AUTHORITY) and the businesses who are already harvesting or mining the resources from the land they control. They do not want new competition resulting in lower prices (see Gabriel Kolko's THE TRIUMPH OF CONSERVATISM which documents the late 19th and early 20th century behind-the-scenes partnership of government and big businesses, which kept those established businesses relatively immune from new competition, all under the guise of "anti big business" legislation and regulation.)

Then there are the crocodile tears of concern about the 'national debt'. If a big chunk of public lands was sold, there could be a breath-taking reduction of this debt. Myths to the contrary of how "we owe it to ourselves" who does collect the interest on this gargantuan debt? Primarily big banks and other financial institutions. And who pays for this debt? TAXPAYERS!

Remember in the classic Old West movies when the local cattle baron (and bad guy) would dam up the water supply so farmers competing for the open land where he feeds his cattle would starve or have to move elsewhere? This meanie didn't want to pay the going price for the land he wanted. And he was ready to use his hired guns to make sure he won. We hated this guy and couldn't wait for the Duke and Gabby to ride into town and make things right. Well bad guys like that still exist, only they've gotten a lot smarter!

Pretend, for a moment, YOU are part of the group of old-line established lenders, foresters and oil companies. How would you keep prices up on the lands that are security for your loans and your products safe from cheaper competition? You could work harder to improve your efficiency, products and services. Maybe...or...

Wouldn't it be easier if you could simply get laws passed that would stop your future competitors in their tracks? What if you could, through the political process, keep new land and resources off the market and therefore unavailable to your would-be competitors?

Now you wouldn't dare try overtly doing this by nationalizing half the country in the name of FatCat Preservation. Although they're getting close, the voters aren't that naive. You'd wind up like the bad guys in the old Westerns. But(stroke chin menacingly)...

What if much of the country was legally off limits to private ownership and development? That could work. But how would you pull off such a grab as that?

HERE'S HOW:

Conceive, support and fund any "worthy" cause you could invent and promote (surreptitiously through third parties) which would deny access to land and resources. Convince a majority of gullible voters that somehow "We all own" these properties together and "we must keep them pristine and pure for everyone," especially animals and children. You fund slick front organizations to employ political and environmental rhetoric to posture as friends of the 'common man. nature, etc.'

All the while, publicly your company seems to be the unwilling subject of this well-intentioned legislation that will save the earth from the likes of you. You'll have the state educators, news media and politicians clamoring to be on your bandwagon. After all, they're on your payroll directly or indirectly too.

Meanwhile your potential competitors and the public are forced to fund all the chaos you generate with THEIR tax monies. Sweet!! The Duke and Gabby won't stand a chance against you because no one knows they're being robbed!

So massive amounts of money go into permanently institutionalized promotions to "save" rain forests, natural habitats, rare and endangered species, ecological 'balance', nature's beauty, etc. Think of how the employees in this new "industry" will vote. Yowzah!!

The "enemies" of environment are labelled "selfish polluters," greedy capitalists, strip miners rich industrialists and callous developers, Bambi killers. Well intentioned (for the most part) environmentalists, conservationists, animal preservasionists, Sierra Clubbers, and all the children they can influence are the unwitting pawns of the very people they believe they oppose. You've cheaply and safely locked the door on your pesky competitors forever and you're ready to go on to the next delightful scam, currently called "climate change."

All the propoganda about saving the land from developers, sprawl, polluters, greedy corporations, ecological disasters, the NRA, has eventuated in a set-up that keeps the rich rich, and...you know the rest.

There is no "We own it" in government. If this still troubles you, think about this: In any meaningful sense, you do not "own" an iota of anything operated or held off the market by government. Not the national parks, not government housing, not the educational system, the money supply, not the IRS. Ownership in reality means the ability to improve, exchange or dispose of at your discretion. Can you sell your imaginary piece of the government largesse? Can you borrow money against it? Or ask yourself this, if it's mine, how can I be arrested for trespassing on it?

Why not release the land and resources to the open market (people who will have a direct stake in making it useful)? It would be a monumental bonanza, notably benefitting those with the least the most! There would be less poverty (not good for control freaks and shysters), far less dependence (anathema to control freaks and shysters), and WAY much more disposable income for whater we choose to spend it on (heresy!!).


Now there's real transparency!!

(Reprinted in part from the 6/17 Front Porch) Original copyright 1999 by Jack Greene, from the Pinnacle Living Learning System




Please share your thoughts below!!