Expat owl Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 they'll not use it for food, as soon as they get hold of their free land, watch how many badly built and unsafe houses pop up without planning permission and tolet signs. I think you'd find that they would sell the land to the highest bidder and then spend the money on beer & fags. Once they had sobered up they would then moan to the surrounding land owners that they had no food and that it was their neighbours social duty to look after them and provide them with food !!! It's just a never ending circle !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWOL Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 Damn you priviliged land owners. You should hand your wealth over to others. I've just worked out your avatar. You are a dick head. Oh dear....scraping the bottom there aren't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FACEBOOK Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 //////////////////// Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expat owl Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 Very valid point. Do we want shanty towns in the peak district ? Id say no. Ive said all this before with little or no response. But I have done lots of driving in all sorts of rural areas this month and the farmers were busy. I know it exists but I didn't see much set aside land. But set aside land is a good thing. Look it up. They've done it for centuries in europe. They don't do it in brazil, and have large tracks of desert as a result. And two other words, water extraction. Yes it's tipped it down this year but hasn't for years. Why would a farmer plant a field that they couldn't get water to ? Finally, on my travels I saw queues of people hurtling out to enjoy our wide open unfarmed spaces. Do we want to live a somewhere that looks like blade runner ? Set aside land, water extraction, etc, etc You sir/madam are simply putting obstacles in the way of change. However don't question the 'nutters' as they won't have any answer. They simply want the land back that was stolen from them in 1066 !! Quite what a 946 yr old would do with land is completely beyond me but....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/politics/2012/09/how-we-pay-our-richest-landowners Not enough houses being built and a land monopoly depriving citizens of their right to use land for housing and employment. Stolen land. Subsidies for landowners who inherit stolen land. And what is more peculiar is the tax upon the serfs to benefit landowners! So people get paid agricultural subsidy for holding idle land, whilst men who wish to pay money to rent a pot of land to grow a small amount of food sit on a waiting list. Some of these landowners claim agricultural subsidy AND rent out the land to tenant farmers! Farmers might be poor, but the people that 'own' (hold) the land they work are not! Whilst people in tiny dwellings living under leasehold/freehold TENURE pay large sums in council tax for but a very very small parcel of land. We are desperately in need of land reform, and we have been since '66 (1066). Turn England's' green and lovely land into a souless and endless desert of drab housing estates filled with deadbeats who want to live in them rent free. Sounds like a wonderful idea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
epiphany Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 Surely we can all at least agree that the state (taxpayers) should not be subsidising land owners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expat owl Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 It may not appear like it to you, but then, appearances can be deceptive as you appear to be sensible. A shame that your comments obviously belie your true feelings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWOL Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 Surely we can all at least agree that the state (taxpayers) should not be subsidising land owners. I can .....they cannot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWOL Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 A shame that your comments obviously belie your true feelings. In your VERY humble opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expat owl Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 In your VERY humble opinion. My humble opinion must be correct considering your removal of the posts where you called me, your window cleaner, your dustbin man and your gardener 'morons' !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.