Page 1 of 2
The Real ownership of land
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:57 am
by Mister Sandman
The post that started it all: [spoiler]
Now for unrelated real-estate, or land ownership arguments. The people who claim that 80% of land is owned by royalty. Are by technicality, correct.
You must understand real is an old term for Royal. Thus, "real" estate is "Royal" estate.
One says "But I own my land, ive paid off any debts on the land."
True, you live on the land, but you cannot, technically pay off debts on the land. There is always going to be tax, there is always going to be the term used is rates.
And, the people who control the money supply control you and inadvertently control all your assets. It is a modern type of royalty.
By the term royalty I don't necessary kings and queens, but some do, to this day, completely control the countries or at least 80% land.
Someone mentioned if royalty controlled 80% of the land 20% of land would be only available for normal populous. But as I stated before, by technicality, your always paying for the land and thus, never owning.
The only way to truly own your land is, Registering your land to your government that your land is a "separate identity" and thus a different country.
But for that case to happen you need to extremely rich, and be able to fund the services that you would need. Without being reliant on another country. That way you can become a king.[/spoiler]
Thriller wrote:All developed countries governments are representative of the people. The people of the country control the land and each citizen within the country is entitled to a piece of that land. When you buy a house you own that land. It is your entitlement. The government is merely the administrative body. If i were merely renting it from the government then they would be responsible for upkeep and and maintenance of that land. It is one of the fundamental differences between public and private ownership.
Quick note: What I am about to talk to you is how modernised society, at least with in a western society works with land "rights".
If you cannot afford land. Then you are not entitled to it. Simply put.
When you buy a house you own that land.
No, you buy the house not the land.
The government is, yes an administrative body, but they are still technically a business. It doesn't do your up-keep on "private" land. Because that's how they make a modern day slave.
"…slavery is but the owning of labor and carries with it the care of laborers, ... capital shall control labor by controlling wages. This can be done by controlling the money. ..."-The Hazard Circular, July, 1862
It doesn't matter, if you "own" or "rent" if you still pay tax, your still owned by someone. Owning a house, or renting is just valuing on how rich of a slave you are.
The only true way as i said before [in a different thread] to be free is, "buy" your freedom. Being , Registering your land to your government that your land is a "separate identity" and thus a different country. And making your land purely separate from everything, purely self-sustainable.
In england the monarchy are merely a figure heads. If they attempted to annex any piece of land owned by a citizen by claiming royal entitlement the courts would always rule in favor of the citizen. Or you would have a riot on your hands. Taking land from someone who is actually breaking the law through their use of the land is a different matter.
Figure heads or not they are still richer than you. And they truely own the land because the state (the government) pays the royal family.
If they did indeed attempt to annex any peace of land, they would do it though the government, and the government would, provide compensation to the citizens.
Take this for example, if a government needed your land for extending roads ect... they WILL take it. In the law system, there is these loop holes for governmental, and royal powers to do this.
And, Thriller My first post I didnt mention government, but you wanted to go down the road so....there you go. There is another power as well, stronger than the government, its the central banks.
Comments please..
Re: The Real ownership of land
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 8:06 am
by Kit-Fox
I've posted this before in the 'should isreal exist' thread i think but here goes again.
In the UK it has been proven by several different people that the UK Royal Family & aristocracy(read: extended royal family) own the lions share of al lthe lands that make up Britian. The latest to do this was a tv program that showed the documentation of the land owners registry on the show, the amount of land owned is somewhere in the region of 70 - 80%.
Now if you wanted to get really anal you could argue that any land that isnt specifically owned by someone else or set aside for public use (ie common ground) is owned lock, stock by the royal family thanks to the norman invasion. The 'Royal' family at the time decreed that they owned all the land and then gifted away sections of it to the lords/barons etc that had supported them.
Oh and just to point out that in the UK if you dig up gold/coal/oil or any ancient artefacts thhey are owned by the Crown, not by you.
Oh and before Thriller comes in spouting about how would the populace of the uk live on only 20% the land, we dont we live all over but just because you own a building does not mean you own the land it was built upon. In the UK buying a building and buying land are two completely different things, not to mention thhat most of the land owned by 'Royalty' is rented out to provide them with incomes & rented out in terms of hundreds of years to other people who then develop infrastructure on the land, saving the royal family the cost of having to do so.
EDIT: some nice lil tidbits for you from various sources:
* The UK has 60 million acres of land in total.
* 70% of the land is owned by 1% of the population.
* Just 6,000 or so landowners -- mostly aristocrats, but also large institutions and the Crown -- own about 40 million acres, two thirds of the UK.
* Britain's top 20 landowning families have bought or inherited an area big enough to swallow up the entire counties of Kent, Essex and Bedfordshire, with more to spare.
* Big landowners measure their holdings by the square mile; the average Briton living in a privately owned property has to exist on 340 square yards.
* 60 million people live in 24 million "dwellings".
* These 24 million dwellings sit on approx 4.4 million acres (7.7% of the land).
* Of the 24 million dwellings, 11% owned by private landlords and 65% privately owned.
* 19 million privately owned homes, inc gardens, sit on 5.8% of the land.
* Average dwelling has 2.4 people in it.
* 77% of the population of 60 million (projected to be more in new census) live on only 5.8% of the land, about 3.5 million acres (total 60 million).
---------
Extraordinary though it might seem, in the 21st century, 0.6 per cent of the British people own 69 per cent of the land on which we live - and they are mostly the same families who owned it in the 19th century.
---------
Re: The Real ownership of land
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 9:50 am
by Thriller
Mister Sandman wrote:The post that started it all: [spoiler]
Now for unrelated real-estate, or land ownership arguments. The people who claim that 80% of land is owned by royalty. Are by technicality, correct.
You must understand real is an old term for Royal. Thus, "real" estate is "Royal" estate.
One says "But I own my land, ive paid off any debts on the land."
True, you live on the land, but you cannot, technically pay off debts on the land. There is always going to be tax, there is always going to be the term used is rates.
And, the people who control the money supply control you and inadvertently control all your assets. It is a modern type of royalty.
By the term royalty I don't necessary kings and queens, but some do, to this day, completely control the countries or at least 80% land.
Someone mentioned if royalty controlled 80% of the land 20% of land would be only available for normal populous. But as I stated before, by technicality, your always paying for the land and thus, never owning.
The only way to truly own your land is, Registering your land to your government that your land is a "separate identity" and thus a different country.
But for that case to happen you need to extremely rich, and be able to fund the services that you would need. Without being reliant on another country. That way you can become a king.[/spoiler]
Thriller wrote:All developed countries governments are representative of the people. The people of the country control the land and each citizen within the country is entitled to a piece of that land. When you buy a house you own that land. It is your entitlement. The government is merely the administrative body. If i were merely renting it from the government then they would be responsible for upkeep and and maintenance of that land. It is one of the fundamental differences between public and private ownership.
Quick note: What I am about to talk to you is how modernised society, at least with in a western society works with land "rights".
If you cannot afford land. Then you are not entitled to it. Simply put.
When you buy a house you own that land.
No, you buy the house not the land.
The government is, yes an administrative body, but they are still technically a business. It doesn't do your up-keep on "private" land. Because that's how they make a modern day slave.
"…slavery is but the owning of labor and carries with it the care of laborers, ... capital shall control labor by controlling wages. This can be done by controlling the money. ..."-The Hazard Circular, July, 1862
It doesn't matter, if you "own" or "rent" if you still pay tax, your still owned by someone. Owning a house, or renting is just valuing on how rich of a slave you are.
The only true way as i said before [in a different thread] to be free is, "buy" your freedom. Being , Registering your land to your government that your land is a "separate identity" and thus a different country. And making your land purely separate from everything, purely self-sustainable.
In england the monarchy are merely a figure heads. If they attempted to annex any piece of land owned by a citizen by claiming royal entitlement the courts would always rule in favor of the citizen. Or you would have a riot on your hands. Taking land from someone who is actually breaking the law through their use of the land is a different matter.
Figure heads or not they are still richer than you. And they truely own the land because the state (the government) pays the royal family.
If they did indeed attempt to annex any peace of land, they would do it though the government, and the government would, provide compensation to the citizens.
Take this for example, if a government needed your land for extending roads ect... they WILL take it. In the law system, there is these loop holes for governmental, and royal powers to do this.
And, Thriller My first post I didnt mention government, but you wanted to go down the road so....there you go. There is another power as well, stronger than the government, its the central banks.
Comments please..
Why do you want to turn this into a discussion about slavery?
@ kitfox i'm still researching English real estate law, I'm having trouble finding info either way about it. You might be right. But i thought the crown turned over it's power of the land to the people (democratic government) which i assumed also meant power over your land.
And I did not say the english population survived on 20% of the land I said that since 80% percent of land is owned by the crown then that means A large portion of the population don't own their own land.
Re: The Real ownership of land
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 11:44 am
by [KMA]Avenger
*takes a deep breath and tries to make this short*
where to start?!
firstly, England is a commonwealth country as we all know, but what most people overlook is the fact that as a commonwealth country the queen is the keeper of the faith, and as such must uphold the laws of the bible NOT the laws and acts passed by parliament. in the bible it states absolutely that we are ALL created equally, that means each and every person living in a commonwealth country is a sovereign on the land and equal to the queen/crown.
that makes us all owners of the land...PERIOD!!!
money has only served to remove our god given or inalienable human rights.
if i go and build myself a house on some unclaimed land, who has the authority to come and take it down and throw me off the land? even if the house i build is unsafe for humans to live in, then its tough crap if it comes down on my head or anybody else who trusted me!!!
Re: The Real ownership of land
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 12:00 pm
by Sammael
ok here ya go.
no one owns anything because when you are gone and trun to dust it will still be there socan you really own anything, answer no you cant even if you are the king or queen of the land it ant yours it belongs to the earth and the earth only she does with it as she wants.
Re: The Real ownership of land
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 3:15 pm
by [KMA]Avenger
do you understand that saying the land belongs to the earth is actually a pagan beliefe in motherearth, otherwise known as Gaia (after the Greek supreme goddess of Earth).
the land belongs to the people, which is passed from 1 generation to the next, and the rightful owner of the land is the 1 true god of heaven and the earth.
whether you believe in god or not is besides the point, the land is held in trust by the people on gods behalf, and if you dont believe in god then it is your inalienable human right to own land and pass that down to your kin when you leave this existence.
saying that the land belongs to the earth or Gaia is in actual fact, elevating Gaia or the earth (which ever you prefer) above God...
sigh!!!
edit:
just for the record, i am in actual fact, agnostic.
Re: The Real ownership of land
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 3:34 pm
by Mister Sandman
[KMA]Avenger wrote:*takes a deep breath and tries to make this short*
where to start?!
firstly, England is a commonwealth country as we all know, but what most people overlook is the fact that as a commonwealth country the queen is the keeper of the faith, and as such must uphold the laws of the bible NOT the laws and acts passed by parliament. in the bible it states absolutely that we are ALL created equally, that means each and every person living in a commonwealth country is a sovereign on the land and equal to the queen/crown.
that makes us all owners of the land...PERIOD!!!
money has only served to remove our god given or inalienable human rights.
1. The queen is not the keeper of the faith.
2.The bible stating "that we are all created equally" is out of context.
3. Your argument is void.if i go and build myself a house on some unclaimed land, who has the authority to come and take it down and throw me off the land?The "owners" of the land. even if the house i build is unsafe for humans to live in, then its tough crap if it comes down on my head or anybody else who trusted me!!!
sammael wrote:ok here ya go.
no one owns anything because when you are gone and trun to dust it will still be there socan you really own anything, answer no you cant even if you are the king or queen of the land it ant yours it belongs to the earth and the earth only she does with it as she wants.
There is a flint of truth in what you saidThriller wrote:Why do you want to turn this into a discussion about slavery?
Just pointing out how we are all enslaved.And I did not say the english population survived on 20% of the land I said that since 80% percent of land is owned by the crown then that means A large portion of the population don't own their own land.
And as ive mentioned my my first post.Someone mentioned if royalty controlled 80% of the land 20% of land would be only available for normal populous. But as I stated before, by technicality, your always paying for the land and thus, never owning.Good to know you read all my posts.[KMA]Avenger wrote:do you understand that saying the land belongs to the earth is actually a pagan beliefe in motherearth, otherwise known as Gaia (after the Greek supreme goddess of Earth).
um? Who cares?the land belongs to the people, which is passed from 1 generation to the next, and the rightful owner of the land is the 1 true god of heaven and the earth.
whether you believe in god or not is besides the point, the land is held in trust by the people on gods behalf, and if you dont believe in god then it is your inalienable human right to own land and pass that down to your kin when you leave this existence.
Right now your ranting on some very useless points. If you read my post. I never stated that the land didnt belong to the people. It is just, the people who own the land are behind the curtain.
In addition what happens to if you have no kin, or if your kin divide against each other?
Re: The Real ownership of land
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 3:45 pm
by Sammael
ok mate so god made the earth and then made us to protect look after it not **Filterd** destroy it, in the end everyone will be gone so youstill can't own the land or object and even if the humen race lives on you still can't own it you die it get's passed on so you can't own it it will still be there when you are gone so yer no you can't own the land. 
Re: The Real ownership of land
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 3:58 pm
by Thriller
sammael wrote:ok mate so god made the earth and then made us to protect look after it not **Filterd** destroy it, in the end everyone will be gone so youstill can't own the land or object and even if the humen race lives on you still can't own it you die it get's passed on so you can't own it it will still be there when you are gone so yer no you can't own the land.
I don't think you understand what ownership means in this context. We are talking about a social contract between
people.
Yes the universe doesn't care about my rights or liberties. But that doesn't have anything to do with what were talking about.
Re: The Real ownership of land
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 10:08 pm
by Kit-Fox
Just to note that the UK isnt a commonwealth country, its just a country. Small but slight difference
If your gonna quote canadian freemen stuff at us get it right
The queen/king of the time is the Defender of the faith & as such is required/supposed to uphold the tennants of the christian faith in thier private & public lives. This is not the same as upholding Laws as set down in the bible which is something completely different
And we dont all own the land, as previously posted the Crown owns all the land in the UK not explictly owned by someone else. You cannot simply find a plot of land and build a house on it, if no one was a registered owner of the plot of land then the Crown would have to power to stop you as they would be the recognised owners.
Re: The Real ownership of land
Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:19 am
by [KMA]Avenger
actually, what i said earlier is what i was taught (by god knows who and when lol), the words i used to describe the queen as "the keeper of the faith" is the exact words that were used to teach me, the freeman stuff only supports what i was taught
Re: The Real ownership of land
Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 2:08 am
by Mister Sandman
[KMA]Avenger wrote:actually, what i said earlier is what i was taught (by god knows who and when lol), the words i used to describe the queen as "the keeper of the faith" is the exact words that were used to teach me, the freeman stuff only supports what i was taught
Don't believe everything you were taught.
Re: The Real ownership of land
Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 6:47 am
by Kit-Fox
[KMA]Avenger wrote:actually, what i said earlier is what i was taught (by god knows who and when lol), the words i used to describe the queen as "the keeper of the faith" is the exact words that were used to teach me, the freeman stuff only supports what i was taught
Its wrong, the king/queen is known as 'The Defender of the Faith' its one of her offical titles for gods sake.
and i quote from
http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/page5658.aspThe Queen's title in the UK is "Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith".
You can be mistaken you know.
There is no easy way to explain the UK's relationship to the commonwealth, but when the term commonwealth countries is used it is usually used in a manner to describe members of the commonwealth (those who wished to join from the nations of the empire and since) it is not usually used to describe the nation that created it or that is in charge, simply put we arent a member we're the ruler
Re: The Real ownership of land
Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 6:58 am
by [KMA]Avenger
Mister Sandman wrote:[KMA]Avenger wrote:actually, what i said earlier is what i was taught (by god knows who and when lol), the words i used to describe the queen as "the keeper of the faith" is the exact words that were used to teach me, the freeman stuff only supports what i was taught
Don't believe everything you were taught.
dose of my own medicine eh
how did i know that was coming?! try not to be so obvious in the future
Re: The Real ownership of land
Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 2:52 am
by Mister Sandman
[KMA]Avenger wrote:Mister Sandman wrote:[KMA]Avenger wrote:actually, what i said earlier is what i was taught (by god knows who and when lol), the words i used to describe the queen as "the keeper of the faith" is the exact words that were used to teach me, the freeman stuff only supports what i was taught
Don't believe everything you were taught.
dose of my own medicine eh
how did i know that was coming?! try not to be so obvious in the future
Good to know you can take it as well deal it out.