5 ms·

Now is the time to buy a flat-ish block of land in Alaska or Tasmania that's a little back from the waters edge. Also make sure you don't have too many tree's t

Now is the time to buy a flat-ish block of land in Alaska or Tasmania that's a little back from the waters edge. Also make sure you don't have too many tree's too close to where you want to build your doomsday cabin. :) Really you don't be between the tropics of Cancer of Capricorn. in the future

johnchristopher 7y ago
When I think about such scenarios I can't help thinking that there might not be any social constructs left to enforce ownership of land :/. When I was a teen I was sure we were headed for a bad future if we didn't act but I always thought it'd come after I am dead. Now I am scared I am going to be old and too frail to manage when life on earth will turn sour. edit: maybe it's time we put out a a Pioneer 10 plate with messages of warning about our own failures. One we send to space, another one we leave on earth.
- LifeLiverTransp 6y ago
  Lets make it a decent grave candle. A Lighttower in space. We start with something like hubble, capable to percieve planets by observation. We put the message into a laser encoded and shine it on planets in habitable zones of diffrent star systems, tracking the planet. If all works right, there should be giant discs of flickering light, racing with rotation speed over cloudy sky, broadcasting our history and warning. The ufos were we all along.
- qqssccfftt 6y ago
  > When I think about such scenarios I can't help thinking that there might not be any social constructs left to enforce ownership of land :/. I can only hope so.
  - skohan 6y ago
    How do you imagine that working in practice? I mean I'm not saying the current structure is perfect, but if everyone had equal claim to land it seems like land usage disputes would just end up being resolved through violence
    - afandian 6y ago
      This is the current model. In many places the violence may be out of living memory, but it's generally all very recent.
      - catawbasam 6y ago
        If it is out of living memory it isn't current.
        afandian 6y ago
        If the model establishes a system where the people who are prepared to use the most violence end up with the land, and a couple of generations their descendants still have the land, then IMHO the model is still in play. You could also argue that as the ownership is codified in laws and the state monopoly on violence keeps the oppressed in check, that threat of violence continues.
        fsloth 6y ago
        "If the model establishes a system where the people who are prepared to use the most violence end up with the land, and a couple of generations their descendants still have the land, then IMHO the model is still in play." This is not about land ownership. Alone. You are talking about exclusive political and economic systems. In an exclusive system it's not just the ownership of land that is broken - you will find all economic activity is rigged against some segment of the society. Most well to do states are have inclusive political and and economic systems. In these societies land ownership is based on land registration and enforceable contract law - not entitlement of birth and violence. I warmly recommend Daron Acemoglu's "Why nations fail" as it explains this topic far better than I ever could in a few sentences.
        afandian 6y ago
        Thanks for the recommendation, I'll look that up.
  - fsloth 6y ago
    State enforced private land ownership is one of the key economic fundamentals of a prosperous society. Historically societies with private land ownership have been wealthier and more inclusive than without (the alternative has been state ownership of all land). Do you have any grounds why you would want it abolished?
    - johnchristopher 6y ago
      > Historically societies with private land ownership have been wealthier and more inclusive than without (the alternative has been state ownership of all land). Am I correct to assume you include communist and feudal regimes ?
      - fsloth 6y ago
        Well, in Feudal system you don't really own the land. You can tax the peasants farming it in exchange for military services for the state. But for example you can't parcel it to small farms and sell those for their owners to keep, or anything like that. You can't use the land as your own capital, with all the financial potential of an asset. I'd love to hear counterexamples, but that's the general gist of it in the large scale I think. Land ownership is not a silver bullet but in general smart parcelling policies have made nations wealthier. So basically, most wealthy states today at some point in their history have issued a parcelling policy that has distributed land ownership among farms. This has made the economic basis more vibrant and more durable. And, probably also affected the evolution of their political institutions to be more inclusive. For example, see the parcelling in my country Finland (which was Sweden at the time) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Partition_(Sweden) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Partition_(Sweden) and earlier in British enclosure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure
- solids 6y ago
  I hope private ownership will remain the same, given the fact that climate change is gradual enough to keep the status quo (which is also a huge downside that prevents humanity in taking coordinate and efficient actions against it)
crishoj 7y ago
Now is the time to aggressively pursue reforestation, especially in the tropics.
- coribuci 6y ago
  > Now is the time to aggressively pursue reforestation, especially in the tropics. Now it's already too late. And anyway, the only thing that is aggressively pursued in the tropics is war which has a catastrofic effect on the environment.
angry-sw-dev 6y ago
Alaska might end up seasonally uninhabitable -- they have periods of the year where the sun doesn't set, with increased greenhouse gases in the area it could become intensely hot for periods of the year. Combine that with periodic ozone holes that appear over arctic areas and it might be just as nasty as areas we worry over today... Areas near large bodies of stable fresh water are likely going to be livable for the longest periods as the planet rapidly shifts away from what we humans need.
vwcx 6y ago
Re: Alaska, beavers are already getting there first and exasperating the climate effects upon the tundra. A fascinating read: https://alaskatrekker.com/2017/11/beavers-moving-northern-alaska-due-climate-change/ https://alaskatrekker.com/2017/11/beavers-moving-northern-al...
- dredmorbius 6y ago
  s/exasperating/exacerbating/ ;-)
  - vwcx 6y ago
    Thanks. I'm getting slopping here in the house with only a single conversation partner most days!

johnchristopher 7y ago

When I think about such scenarios I can't help thinking that there might not be any social constructs left to enforce ownership of land :/. When I was a teen I was sure we were headed for a bad future if we didn't act but I always thought it'd come after I am dead. Now I am scared I am going to be old and too frail to manage when life on earth will turn sour. edit: maybe it's time we put out a a Pioneer 10 plate with messages of warning about our own failures. One we send to space, another one we leave on earth.

LifeLiverTransp 6y ago
Lets make it a decent grave candle. A Lighttower in space. We start with something like hubble, capable to percieve planets by observation. We put the message into a laser encoded and shine it on planets in habitable zones of diffrent star systems, tracking the planet. If all works right, there should be giant discs of flickering light, racing with rotation speed over cloudy sky, broadcasting our history and warning. The ufos were we all along.
qqssccfftt 6y ago
> When I think about such scenarios I can't help thinking that there might not be any social constructs left to enforce ownership of land :/. I can only hope so.
- skohan 6y ago
  How do you imagine that working in practice? I mean I'm not saying the current structure is perfect, but if everyone had equal claim to land it seems like land usage disputes would just end up being resolved through violence
  - afandian 6y ago
    This is the current model. In many places the violence may be out of living memory, but it's generally all very recent.
    - catawbasam 6y ago
      If it is out of living memory it isn't current.
      - afandian 6y ago
        If the model establishes a system where the people who are prepared to use the most violence end up with the land, and a couple of generations their descendants still have the land, then IMHO the model is still in play. You could also argue that as the ownership is codified in laws and the state monopoly on violence keeps the oppressed in check, that threat of violence continues.
        fsloth 6y ago
        "If the model establishes a system where the people who are prepared to use the most violence end up with the land, and a couple of generations their descendants still have the land, then IMHO the model is still in play." This is not about land ownership. Alone. You are talking about exclusive political and economic systems. In an exclusive system it's not just the ownership of land that is broken - you will find all economic activity is rigged against some segment of the society. Most well to do states are have inclusive political and and economic systems. In these societies land ownership is based on land registration and enforceable contract law - not entitlement of birth and violence. I warmly recommend Daron Acemoglu's "Why nations fail" as it explains this topic far better than I ever could in a few sentences.
        afandian 6y ago
        Thanks for the recommendation, I'll look that up.
- fsloth 6y ago
  State enforced private land ownership is one of the key economic fundamentals of a prosperous society. Historically societies with private land ownership have been wealthier and more inclusive than without (the alternative has been state ownership of all land). Do you have any grounds why you would want it abolished?
  - johnchristopher 6y ago
    > Historically societies with private land ownership have been wealthier and more inclusive than without (the alternative has been state ownership of all land). Am I correct to assume you include communist and feudal regimes ?
    - fsloth 6y ago
      Well, in Feudal system you don't really own the land. You can tax the peasants farming it in exchange for military services for the state. But for example you can't parcel it to small farms and sell those for their owners to keep, or anything like that. You can't use the land as your own capital, with all the financial potential of an asset. I'd love to hear counterexamples, but that's the general gist of it in the large scale I think. Land ownership is not a silver bullet but in general smart parcelling policies have made nations wealthier. So basically, most wealthy states today at some point in their history have issued a parcelling policy that has distributed land ownership among farms. This has made the economic basis more vibrant and more durable. And, probably also affected the evolution of their political institutions to be more inclusive. For example, see the parcelling in my country Finland (which was Sweden at the time) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Partition_(Sweden) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Partition_(Sweden) and earlier in British enclosure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure
solids 6y ago
I hope private ownership will remain the same, given the fact that climate change is gradual enough to keep the status quo (which is also a huge downside that prevents humanity in taking coordinate and efficient actions against it)

crishoj 7y ago

Now is the time to aggressively pursue reforestation, especially in the tropics.

coribuci 6y ago
> Now is the time to aggressively pursue reforestation, especially in the tropics. Now it's already too late. And anyway, the only thing that is aggressively pursued in the tropics is war which has a catastrofic effect on the environment.

angry-sw-dev 6y ago

Alaska might end up seasonally uninhabitable -- they have periods of the year where the sun doesn't set, with increased greenhouse gases in the area it could become intensely hot for periods of the year. Combine that with periodic ozone holes that appear over arctic areas and it might be just as nasty as areas we worry over today... Areas near large bodies of stable fresh water are likely going to be livable for the longest periods as the planet rapidly shifts away from what we humans need.

vwcx 6y ago

Re: Alaska, beavers are already getting there first and exasperating the climate effects upon the tundra. A fascinating read: https://alaskatrekker.com/2017/11/beavers-moving-northern-alaska-due-climate-change/ https://alaskatrekker.com/2017/11/beavers-moving-northern-al...

dredmorbius 6y ago
s/exasperating/exacerbating/ ;-)
- vwcx 6y ago
  Thanks. I'm getting slopping here in the house with only a single conversation partner most days!