Purchasing Atlantis from a debt-ridden country, but with autonomy built into the purchasing agreement?
Many of us, led by db and Kh, have been debating the subject of immigration. I would love to see America get back to her pre-1913 roots, but for numerous reasons, I think that such effort is a waste of time and resources.
Freedomforall, in response to my suggestion that America sell its "government land" to pay down at least part of its debt, asked if such a sale could include the right to secede.
That prompted me to consider the possibility of buying land from debt-ridden countries (some of which are experiencing hyperinflation) at rockbottom prices, with autonomy being required as a condition of purchase. As debt piles up all around the world, there will be some opportunities along these lines for vultures like myself to come scavenge the debris. Perhaps an island off the Venezuelan coast with some nearby oil? In our previous discussions about a physical Gulch, our premise had been to buy land that the nearby government would largely ignore based on its track record of freedom (or lack thereof). That may be the wrong premise to work from. Why should we not provide a value for value trade in their time of desperation? The question then is how long do we wait. The price for the land in such desperate countries should continue to go down, but the conditions in our own countries might get bad enough that we could get trapped by 10-289.
The United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Thailand are working toward the development of micronations off their coasts. Interestingly, Google is developing the first such island. The linked article describes some of the first work along these lines.
Freedomforall, in response to my suggestion that America sell its "government land" to pay down at least part of its debt, asked if such a sale could include the right to secede.
That prompted me to consider the possibility of buying land from debt-ridden countries (some of which are experiencing hyperinflation) at rockbottom prices, with autonomy being required as a condition of purchase. As debt piles up all around the world, there will be some opportunities along these lines for vultures like myself to come scavenge the debris. Perhaps an island off the Venezuelan coast with some nearby oil? In our previous discussions about a physical Gulch, our premise had been to buy land that the nearby government would largely ignore based on its track record of freedom (or lack thereof). That may be the wrong premise to work from. Why should we not provide a value for value trade in their time of desperation? The question then is how long do we wait. The price for the land in such desperate countries should continue to go down, but the conditions in our own countries might get bad enough that we could get trapped by 10-289.
The United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Thailand are working toward the development of micronations off their coasts. Interestingly, Google is developing the first such island. The linked article describes some of the first work along these lines.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 2.
I consider taxation robbery; therefore, even if he
had been delinquent, I still consider that person a
victim.
government auctioned it off for "unpaid taxes" on the part of the owner it took it from, then it seems
to me that there would be a victim. Now, if were
just previously unowned land that the government
laid a claim to, I can see how you would be right.
Simply because to verify your access, you submit info from a third party and check what you see for that info.
I would attribute it if I knew the origin. I know Robert Heinlein used it in a few places.
A good idea may be to find an underwater mount (similar to New Utopia idea), for anchorage, but to be honest, I always thought of free floating. Engines-props can keep us in a stable position.
Once we are in international waters, who could object?
Case 1: The land is private, but in a debt-ridden country. In that case, I can do value-for-value exchange with the individual(s), but have to also negotiate with the government(s) regarding autonomy, non-aggression, etc.
Cases 2 and 3: I think this is what you are asking about. The government claims to own the land. According to Objectivism, "government land" is land no one owns, but everyone pays for. Government undoubtedly confiscated it, whether it be via taxes on everyone or by failure to pay taxes by an individual or company. In the latter case of government auctioning off land for unpaid taxes, then there is no "victim", and I have no problem buing the land guilt-free. In the former case, however, of selling land that was never owned by individuals or companies, then there is an endless number of victims, but none were truly owners.
One of the Ferengi rules of acquisition applies here.
162. Even in the worst of times somebody turns a profit.
(I would like that to be me.)
a) In providing a value for value transaction, I need feel no guilt.
b) They are getting something to continue their meager existences. Eudaimonia criticized this concept earlier today, but if someone chooses to live in a country that is so debt-ridden that it is bankrupt, then either they are moochers, they are looters, or they are too dumb to get out.
c) For those smart enough to get out and want to come to a country of sanity, one of us will gladly employ them.
Load more comments...