7 ms·
Some people were talking about owning lots of land in case society breaks down, but owning large swathes of land you cannot actively defend is pointless for the
by xwdv 5y ago
Some people were talking about owning lots of land in case society breaks down, but owning large swathes of land you cannot actively defend is pointless for these reasons. You depend on government to enforce rules of law to keep people off vast amounts of land. And it gets exponentially harder to defend land the more of it you have.
This applies really to any resource though. Even your home could be taken away if the threat of punishment from a higher authority didn’t exist.
- ethbr0 5y agoGood point. Unpaid externalities of security: large landowners' needs for land security are higher (than resident parcels), but they certainly don't pay more taxes per acre (indeed, sometimes less). But at the same time, efficiencies of scale in many land-intensive industries cannot be realized without large areas being combined for a single purpose. Hard circle to square.
- Glavnokoman 5y agoactually it becomes easier since the frontier length growth linearly and the surface proportionally to the square of some characteristic size of your plot. The other thing is that you can't do it yourself starting from some point, so you must hire somebody or establish a community protecting the land while living on some portion of it.