why doesn't the government sell land to poor people?

R

republicanchick

New member
There are some in the nation who are poor through (almost) no fault of their own. True, in every poverty case, the person who is poor has SOME culpability for being poor, but a lot of the time (and I mean this.. a LOT Of the Time) there are factors (egregious ones) beyond that person's control: extreme depression and hopelessness... mental illness (so called), no family structure, abusive or negligent family "structure"... etc.

And so, there are poor people. Well, maybe if they were allowed to buy land from the gov at very low prices, they could

  1. have a reason to live (if they do not already)
  2. be incentivized to do something with what they have
  3. be given some hope of a better future
  4. make use of land that is currently not being used for anything
  5. etc..
++


+
 
T

TrakeM

New member
Christianity clearly states that government aid should only be given to the christian lord god and savior, corrupt wall street executives with lobbyists. You know, the holy job creators, peace and blessings be upon them. And government hand outs.

You just need to understand that government hand outs are ok if given to the wealthy but not if given to the poor. The poor are poor because they are lazy and worthless. This is the teachings of the one true god, corrupt wall street executives. Never mind those pesky facts about how we gave land to large corporations nearly for free. Never mind the fact we lend money to the banks at 0.75% interest. Never mind the rampant corruption. Being a good christian means supporting the christian god and hating gay people.
 
musterion

musterion

Well-known member
How do you sell something to someone who doesn't have money?

Why doesn't Rome do it?

Why don't you?

So many questions your idiotic non-questions raise. So few answers you provide.
 
PureX

PureX

Well-known member
Technically, the government doesn't own any land, it only manages land that we the people own, collectively. Likewise, the government doesn't own any of the natural resources on or under the land we own, though it is in charge of managing those for us.

Unfortunately, as TrakeM has already pointed out, our government is being controlled by "lobbyists", who are essentially just the bag men for very wealthy corporate special interests who use them to dispense legal and illegal bribe money to the member of the Congress and the Senate to give them access to, and control of those collectively owned lands and resources, so they can exploit them for their own economic gain.

Poor people don't have the money to bribe these legislators, so the legislators will continue to ignore their needs, or desires, and ours, too. Right now, all the decisions our government is making at both the state and the federal level are all being made by these wealthy special interests, through their legalized the bribery of the legislature. And until that changes, no idea, good, bad, or indifferent, will even be considered, unless our lawmakers are told to consider them by their bribe-masters. Which isn't going to happen because their bribe-masters don't care about the poor, or about us, at all. All they care about is making more money for themselves.
 
T

TrakeM

New member
PureX said:
Technically, the government doesn't own any land, it only manages land that we the people own, collectively. Likewise, the government doesn't own any of the natural resources on or under the land we own, though it is in charge of managing those for us.

Unfortunately, as TrakeM has already pointed out, our government is being controlled by "lobbyists", who are essentially just the bag men for very wealthy corporate special interests who use them to dispense legal and illegal bribe money to the member of the Congress and the Senate to give them access to, and control of those collectively owned lands and resources, so they can exploit them for their own economic gain.

Poor people don't have the money to bribe these legislators, so the legislators will continue to ignore their needs, or desires, and ours, too. Right now, all the decisions our government is making at both the state and the federal level are all being made by these wealthy special interests, through their legalized the bribery of the legislature. And until that changes, no idea, good, bad, or indifferent, will even be considered, unless our lawmakers are told to consider them by their bribe-masters. Which isn't going to happen because their bribe-masters don't care about the poor, or about us, at all. All they care about is making more money for themselves.
Click to expand...
My dream is that some day all the evangelicals will make it clear that they won't tolerate this with the same ferocity that they have voiced on the issue of same-sex marriage. If they do, I think christianity could be a force for good in this world. I think christians would find that they have more allies in the secular world than they think they do. It would be glorious.

Barring that, my dream is that christianity declines into oblivion and be replaced with actual morals that will push people to stand against this corruption. To be honest I'm thinking it more likely for christianity to decline and be replaced with actual morals than for christians to stand together against corruption the way they do against same-sex marriage. I hope christians will prove me wrong.
 
T

TrakeM

New member
musterion said:
How do you sell something to someone who doesn't have money?

Why doesn't Rome do it?

Why don't you?

So many questions your idiotic non-questions raise. So few answers you provide.
Click to expand...
There have been cases of state governments selling large tracts of land to corporations for only a dollar. We're talking about corporations with lobbyists and large donations to political campaigns. That last fact was, I'm sure, completely unrelated and only an irrelevant side note. Never mind the man behind the curtain.
 
T

TrakeM

New member
republicanchick said:
I knew this wasn't worth reading when I got this far


outa here
Click to expand...
I'm typing on a cell phone. That sentence didn't come out right. Gay people wasn't supposed to be in that sentence. christianity is about serving the wealthy and corrupt and hating gay people.
 
R

republicanchick

New member
TrakeM said:
I'm typing on a cell phone. That sentence didn't come out right. Gay people wasn't supposed to be in that sentence. christianity is about serving the wealthy and corrupt and hating gay people.
Click to expand...

that is one of the dumbest things I have heard in a long time

not even going to dignify it with a response

waste o'time



__
 
R

republicanchick

New member
shagster01 said:
Then they should sell it to me for that price too. Why discriminate against me because I have a nice job?
Click to expand...

It is very difficult for a person with nothing to get.. something. It is not impossible, but extremely difficult.

an acre of land is NOT a huge entitlement program. And the gov would get money for it, albeit not a huge amount.. the gov doesn't NEED a huge amount.. it has plenty already..

so I guess u would begrudge the homeless anything?

figures


__
 
shagster01

shagster01

New member
republicanchick said:
It is very difficult for a person with nothing to get.. something. It is not impossible, but extremely difficult.

an acre of land is NOT a huge entitlement program. And the gov would get money for it, albeit not a huge amount.. the gov doesn't NEED a huge amount.. it has plenty already..

so I guess u would begrudge the homeless anything?

figures


__
Click to expand...

An acre is more than I have. I worked hard for my 1/4 acre and these poor people would get more?
 
R

republicanchick

New member
shagster01 said:
An acre is more than I have. I worked hard for my 1/4 acre and these poor people would get more?
Click to expand...

my plan says that is all they get from the gov: cheap land, and no taxes for a year, low taxes after that.

I don't think that is unreasonable.

ther are some (you?) who just hate the poor, it seems

Newsflash: the poor are not poor solely due to their OWN choices


++
 
shagster01

shagster01

New member
republicanchick said:
my plan says that is all they get from the gov: cheap land, and no taxes for a year, low taxes after that.

I don't think that is unreasonable.

ther are some (you?) who just hate the poor, it seems

Newsflash: the poor are not poor solely due to their OWN choices


++
Click to expand...

I still don't see how they are entitled to more land than me just because they are poor.
 
T

TrakeM

New member
shagster01 said:
I still don't see how they are entitled to more land than me just because they are poor.
Click to expand...
Yeah, those hand outs are for wealthy corporations with lobbyists.

Note: The US government sells land to corporations at some staggeringly low rates.
 
R

rexlunae

New member
republicanchick said:
There are some in the nation who are poor through (almost) no fault of their own. True, in every poverty case, the person who is poor has SOME culpability for being poor, but a lot of the time (and I mean this.. a LOT Of the Time) there are factors (egregious ones) beyond that person's control: extreme depression and hopelessness... mental illness (so called), no family structure, abusive or negligent family "structure"... etc.

And so, there are poor people. Well, maybe if they were allowed to buy land from the gov at very low prices, they could

  1. have a reason to live (if they do not already)
  2. be incentivized to do something with what they have
  3. be given some hope of a better future
  4. make use of land that is currently not being used for anything
  5. etc..
++


+
Click to expand...

1. Why would this be more helpful than other forms of welfare? They need food, shelter, and opportunities for self-advancement more immediately than land.
2. What land would the government give them? Are we talking about relocating poor people from south-central LA to rural Wyoming? Governments have very limited amounts of land in places that would be useful for lots and lots of poor people, and usually they have it for a good reason.
3. Who would pay for it? And what would we give up for it?
4. This could potentially crash property values for existing landowners invested in their property. How are they compensated?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top