Posted on 12/26/2024 3:55:07 PM PST by karpov
The incoming Trump administration will confront some huge financial challenges. It will have to cope with the vast increase in the national debt created by the Biden administration’s reckless spending. It will also need to maintain the solvency of the Social Security system after decades of financial irresponsibility by politicians of both parties.
On top of all this, there is an urgent need to build up American military defenses, which have been neglected while taxpayers’ money has been lavishly spent on such things as subsidizing electric cars and paying hotel expenses for illegal immigrants.
There is no question that doing all the things that urgently need doing will require huge amounts of additional government spending. The key question is: Where will the government get this money?
There is much to be said for the new administration’s plan to have a nongovernmental organization investigate how well, or how badly, government agencies are currently handling the taxpayers’ money. But there is a limit to how much money can be recovered by simply cutting back on “waste, fraud and abuse” in federal spending.
There are, however, additional billions of dollars that could be tapped, from a source that not many people think about. That is the vast—almost unbelievable—amount of land owned by the federal government. Some of that land—such as military bases—is used to house the government’s own operations. But the great majority of that land is not.
The rest of this government-owned land is so vast that there is little to compare it with—except whole countries. And not small countries like Belgium or Portugal. The amount of land owned by the National Park Service alone is larger than Italy. The land owned by the Fish and Wildlife Service is larger than Germany.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
The FEDS CONTROL-—BUT DO NOT OWN 86% of NEVADA....
THEY PAY NO TAXES.
Fire the fed.
“You’re fired”
Land can be leased out.
If you don’t care for federal land lease rules, lease already privately-owned land.
There’s no real need for more ranch land. Beef is insanely expensive. I’m refusing to buy it. The beef packers have to be broken up.
The supply of water to California’s prime farm has been drastically reduced. Supply water to the prime farmland first.
You don’t dump every acre of land the federal government owns on the market just as you would not list every condo in NYC at the same time.
Some land is too poor to be farmed. In the mid-1930s the skies of eastern cities were blackened by soil from land that should not have been farmed.
Some rich Westerner would buy ‘sensitive’ land.
The enviro-whackos will then scream.
The federal government will then have to buy it back at ten to one hundred times the price it was sold off for.
Students, this is Exhibit "A" for "Cognitive Dissonance."
Hawaiian farmland of great quality has been abandoned.
It’s cheaper to grow pineapples and sugar outside the USA.
And a whole lot of other stuff, such as tomatoes and cantaloupes.
Up until now I thought the guy had a brain.
“Students, this is Exhibit “A” for “Cognitive Dissonance.””
The ranchers get little profit because of the packers.
How much are the ranchers getting per pound?
Giving the packers even more bargaining power won’t help.
Giving Nevada ranchers give-away pricing on federal land will make it more difficult for Texan and Stockton, California ranchers.
And what happens when the Democrats regain control?
They’ll want the ranches shut down due to bovine methane.
The ranchers will rightly insist of refunds of the money paid for the land, and the fencing, and the new buildings.
And what’s to stop Mr. Chang who entered the USA in January 2021 from buying the land with a loan from the People’s Bank of Beijing of PLA money?
And what’s to stop Mrs. Choa from funding environmentalists?
Ahh--that must explain all those puny little 8,000-10,000 sqft houses sitting on thousands of acres I see when driving past cattle ranches.
And yes--I've driven past hundreds of them as I live in a cattle state.
Yep. Land sales used to be a significant source of revenues for the federal government in the first 80 or so years of the Republic. The Federal government still owns absolutely vast amounts of land in the West. Why? There’s no reason why the federal government should be holding all that land. Sell parts of it off and raise money.....and the businesses, houses, etc that will spring up on that privately owned land after the sale will raise additional tax revenue every year. It is also what people in the western states overwhelmingly want.
The US needs to think about implementing restrictions on non resident aliens owning residential real estate in the US. Almost every other country has such restrictions so as to keep housing affordable for their own citizens.
WIKI
Plunkitt defended his own actions, saying: “I could get nothin’ at a bargain but a big piece of swamp, but I took it fast enough and held on to it. What turned out was just what I counted on. They couldn’t make the park complete without Plunkitt’s swamp, and they had to pay a good price for it. Anything dishonest in that?”
Plunkitt is also remembered for the line he used to defend his actions: “I seen my opportunities and I took ‘em.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Plunkitt
“Thursday, December 26, 2024”
“The unfortunate truth is most ranches operate at an annual economic loss of 1.5% return on assets. This is not to say they’re not profitable. Ranchers work hard and pay their bills. However, when all the numbers are “penciled,” they are not coming out with a positive number at the end of the year.
“Many ranches, for example, wouldn’t count the family’s labor as a business expense. Since they live and work on the ranch, it’s not factored in as a cost. Many own the land they ranch on, so there’s no rent or other real estate investment costs.”
How can someone paying substantial money for second-rate or third-rate land going to be able to compete with already paid-off first-rate land?
“Cognitive Dissonance.”
And wouldn’t it be better to break up the packers before selling off the land (if you are hell bent on doing that)?
“all those puny little 8,000-10,000 sq.ft. houses”
The ranchers will rightly insist of refunds of the money paid for the land, and the fencing, and the new buildings.
What do you think “Real Estate” means?
It’s never really yours.
“The US needs to think about implementing restrictions on non resident aliens owning residential real estate in the US.”
Beijing Anchor Baby secured a loan from PLA Bank of Beijing to buy a home in her native land.
Her parents are looking online for a ranch for her to buy.
Beijing Anchor Baby has just been registered by her parents to be able to bid in Trump’s massive land auctions.
“that must explain all those puny little 8,000-10,000 sqft houses sitting on thousands of acres”
Many rich people from California and metro NYC know the value of owning lots of land.
And one really rich guy from Seattle does too.
Scarlett O’Hara, final scene:
https://www.tiktok.com/@scrouse333/video/7231894267260767534
“Land’s...the only thing that lasts”
Bkmk
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.