>>1444407On the contrary, developement of land is the reason it should be owned. It's protection of our labors to improve what nature gave us. Having said that, undeveloped land should not be for sale except under strict requirements. I have a plan for this.
Purchasers need to have a requirement to settle the land. Permanent residence on the first acre, with a gap of no more than a week of time spent living there for the first year. A temporary permit is issued for this, with the deed finalized and recorded on the one-year anniversary. Residence doesn't have to be in a building. Could be a tent, a car, a cave, doesnt matter, just have to spend a minimum of 24 hours there in any 7 day period. Additional acreage may be bought, contiguous to the 1st acre lived on, if it is developed into farm land (even if it's agroforestry). Any land to be sold otherwise (commercial, industrial) must be agreed upon by voters of the county it is located in. Same residency requirements for habitation time will apply to these lands as well, except in the form of commercial/industrial activity instead of residency.
Abandoned land (not used for a continuous week the first year, or 3 continuous months any time after) is to be confiscated and placed for sale again. Should it not sell at market value for 90 days, the property is demolished and the land returns to nature.
All sales proceeds go to a fund that will be used to pay for enforcement and rehabilitation of abandoned land.
Current deeds on private land will be grandfathered in for a time equivalent to that which has passed since the latest deed was recorded. After that the residency requirements will kick in. Deeds recorded within the last year will counted as new sales made on the day of the law going until effect.
This plan would reduce exploitation of land by banks and industry, do away with vast tracts of private undeveloped land, reduce the price barrier to ownership, and protect the rest of nature from unnecessary privatization.
