Could Trump's proposed "Freedom Cities" (built on federal land) ever become Galt's gulches?

Posted by bubah1mau 1 year, 2 months ago to Technology
29 comments | Share | Flag

Things like this were tried at the dawn of the automobile age. Anyhow, it's thinking somewhat "outside the box." There might be some hope if it can be financed with private capital. If it's government (tax, printed currency) financed, it's a boondoggle.
SOURCE URL: https://www.bizpacreview.com/2023/03/05/our-country-has-lost-its-boldness-trump-proposes-building-new-freedom-cities-on-federal-land-1337964/


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by evlwhtguy 1 year, 2 months ago
    Not too jazzed about any government program to "Build" anything. There is a long history of government planned "from a greenfield" cities failing and becoming boondoggles.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Dobrien 1 year, 2 months ago
    First the Elections must be secure , fair and legal.
    And all the swamp must be tried for crimes against humanity and treason. The Fed must be bankrupted and the Dollar pegged to gold. The Eurodollars declared worthless unless proven they were not illegally obtained. That said we do need a vision for the future and talking about having competition to find the best designs is a novel approach.lol
    Nothing said by Trump is a negative imo.
    This sounds like an idea that could be similar to a homesteading of federal land with a twist. I can see
    Many benefits of working from scratch to build a city.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by bobsprinkle 1 year, 2 months ago
      As long as repubs do not control BOTH house and senate there willNEVER fave fair elections
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 1 year, 2 months ago
        Disagree. Whats needed is the abolition of the two party system in favor of an open number of parties to choose from. Just like the free market was supposed to be, the more choices there are in the market the less the consumer cost (in this case, less political duplicity, elitist camaraderie culture, and corruption). Imaging a politician having to be honest because 12 other parties candidates will rip him/her apart for what he says and his record.

        We can afford to do this using what we have, NPR, C-SPAN,C_SPAN2, and allot equal air time on those services to address the public and debate.

        The R's are the upside in the of a coin sitting in a shallow cesspool (swamp) puddle.Equally filthy only not quite a much as being submerged in the shit.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Dobrien 1 year, 2 months ago
          Yes , End the dualopoly and the big donor/ lobby machine. Competition in a free market or laissez-faire, French “allow to do” capitalist system is the best system known to man. What are Called RINOS might be better described as Con Inc. or conservative Inc. That is the group led by the vagina rot oops I meant Rotteney McDaniels and Turtlehead NeoConman and the Queer Ryan all shilled for by the fraud Sean Hannity. Btw it’s looking like Desanctimonious is in that camp. For any disagreeing with that prove me wrong.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 1 year, 2 months ago
    I watched Trump's speech on this and had mixed thoughts. Yes to the Fed giving up land to the people, but would this be another multi-trillion dollar government boondoggle in the end? Didn't China and North Korea build cities of no use? Good intentions here, but I'm sure the Neo Communists (Democrats) will have a lot of say and that will spoil the whole thing - let your imaginations run wild on that one.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 1 year, 2 months ago
      The federal government are stewards of the land, not the owners. The states have more ownership of the land in their boundries even then they do not own it. The evils C-word, collectively all land within its borders is ultimately owned by the american people with states and federal entities acting as stewards.

      Today there is a strong case for no representation and no stewardship from state or federal officials

      Why buy what we already own? Why be headed into large camps and require passports and permits to go to explore our own country.

      The idea is absurd and insulting..
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 1 year, 2 months ago
        I reread that I wrote earlier and had an epiphany. What he/they are suggesting are RESERVATIONS just like early americans did to the native population who survived euro-diseases.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ DriveTrain 1 year, 2 months ago
    This is facepalm material, but Trump has done us all a favor in revealing a.) that the driving force behind his entire mindset is pragmatism and b.) that he is oblivious to what ought to be that driving force: principle.

    Where to begin? Morality of course. Everything about this proposal presupposes government planning, not free enterprise and individual choice. Government urban planning is not permitted by the United States Constitution, because it has absolutely nothing to do with the sole purpose for which governments are instituted among men in the first place, per the Declaration: "to secure rights." As Rand correctly pointed out, this means 1. The Armed Forces, to secure rights against foreign aggressors, 2. the Police, to secure rights against internal criminals (I was a crime victim just an hour and a half ago, as it happens,) and 3. the Courts, to secure rights via the arbitration of disputes and the enforcement of contracts. Nothing about "hold[ing] a contest to charter up to 10 new cities" in my copy of the Constitution. The fact that governments at levels Federal, State and Local do indeed engage in planning-by-force does not alter the fact, it just means government entities are flouting their Constitutional constraints. Trump ought to know this, but he either does not know or does not care.

    Secondly is simple no-brainer logic: American cities and cities everywhere on Earth arose spontaneously by the free choices of individual people because their locations are central to trade, transportation and resources. Yes, the fact that government - again, extra-Constitutionally - has confiscated vast acreages of the people's land (not to mention truly mind-boggling areas of ocean,) is a factor in preventing development on those lands from the outset. But cities developed where they did - and failed to develop elsewhere - long before the government began its massive, repeated and multi-partisan land-thefts, and did so - or failed to do so - for a reason. Their locations make sense. Others don't.

    Which brings us to number three: In proposing this idiotic scheme, using "a small portion of Federally-controlled land" - while utterly defaulting on the leadership needed to force government to divest of all such confiscated land (and ocean areas) - he only primes the collectivist crowd's backlash pump. If he keeps spouting this stuff it will provide the Left with a rallying cry for strengthening and solidifying the government's hold on these ill-gotten lands, not for releasing them back to the people to which they belong. It's almost as if that's his intent. "A small portion?" WTH

    Fourth, and a related point, he apparently remains oblivious too to the United Nations' "Agenda 21 / Agenda 2030" plan, of which those land confiscations have been a key part and which massive land divestitures under a principled Republican leader would comprise a crippling blow against that UN "Agenda." But we've gotten pin-drop silence from him on the entire issue. His labeling his proposal as "Agenda 47" (whatever the "47" means,) is almost like thumbing his nose at us people who have been sounding the alarm on the UN's atrocious blueprint for global serfdom by the end of this century.

    This idea is at once inexplicable and idiotic.
    .
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by chad 1 year, 2 months ago
    Asking the government for permission to do something is admitting that you have no rights. The government is not permitted to own land, except the 10 square miles for the seat of government. If the government owns and controls land then the people are not free. The government indebts your land without permission and then forces you to pay property taxes to prevent eviction.
    Trying to tinker with the current system and hope something beneficial happens is a waste of time and resources.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Stormi 1 year, 2 months ago
    Not a chance, not even with Trump, as he never gets the right people. Gult's Gulch, could only be private, government soon corrupts anything it touches, then lies about it. Even Wright's Broadacre City, never rally came into being as planned. We would need a serious revanp of our government to even plan such a thing. Instead, we are seeing the complete loss of personal repsonsibility in each new generation.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Abaco 1 year, 2 months ago
    I took some interest on The Donald's comments on this. First, it will never be allowed to happen because he brought it up. But, it's a nice idea coming from a candidate for the highest office...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Snezzy 1 year, 2 months ago
    A Quantum Leap. Oh dear! The perils of having studied physics!

    In the 20th Century the quantum-leap concept was popular. (Physicists now use other terms instead.) The amount of energy for a single quantum leap was perhaps one tenth of an attojoule. Wanna know how much that is? "Atto" means 10 to the negative 18th, and a joule is one watt-second. Still mystified? Physics homework beckons. Get out your dusty books that languish unread on that shelf in the basement.

    So it's a term for something that's very, very tiny being misused to mean something rather huge. Yugely, perhaps.

    It actually serves its purpose well, though, because anything Trump says is designed to create controversy. It's how he can live in your head, or nearly anybody's, almost totally rent free.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by giallopudding 1 year, 2 months ago
    I like the idea of the federal government releasing land into the private sector for development. But government shouldn't dictate how that development happens. Government-planned cities always fail.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by 1 year, 2 months ago
    The issue of federal land has always bothered me. For one thing, if the federal government was to get out of the "business" (monopoly) of controlling money and the issuance of currency, it would have to have some asset it could use to compensate the holders of government currency. What else does it have besides federally owned real estate (including national forest and national parks)? Does anyone actually believe the federal government still has a gold reserve?

    Therefore I'm skeptical about piecemeal privatization of federal assets. They should be kept as a last reserve in case the people ever see the light and demand the government quit the money/banking business. Unless people with paper dollars get something for them if the government quits, there will be a lot of extremely angry people who will know they've been cheated.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ katrinam41 1 year, 2 months ago
    This intense discussion has led me to wonder just exactly what this group would do to establish a thriving Gulch. For myself, the basic move would be a plainly stated Constitution for a Constitutional republic. The simple document would limit terms, make any property illegal to own by the very limited government, except for the few square miles of the capitol city. There would be no Federal Reserve running the show, there WOULD BE a gold standard, the yearly budget would be balanced and strictly adhered to, no bill would pass with more than one item to deal with. Tax would be a local/state sales tax--no tax on property sales, food, medicine, fuel, delete irs, no minimum wage. Even if with the Objectivist philosophy we all share, there is a huge variation in how we all see a functioning Galt's Gulch. The Freedom Cities will never fit their intended purpose. I plan on posting an Ask the Gulch on just this subject.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CaptainKirk 1 year, 2 months ago
    First, I LOVE the concept of starting over.
    We know that we can design houses that use 70% less energy by design. This is well worth the investment. Next, we CAN design much much better environments to live in...

    But from the guy who brought us the VAXX...

    What's the difference between a Trump City, and a 15 Minute City?

    The person selling it? The Price? Because I don't see a difference otherwise!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Dobrien 1 year, 2 months ago
      Sorry but Trump Brought us hydroxycloroQuine and Ivermectin. When he did the media lied and said he wanted people to drink bleach. Gates and big Pharma brought us the Vaccine. Trump hurried it along to end the lockdowns, they wanted us locked down for years.
      Think of it as punch and counterpunch.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by CaptainKirk 1 year, 2 months ago
        Yes, but when his UNDERLING purposefully made HCQ un-available Trump signed that order, not realizing it. Then that guy was NOT Fired, and the issue was not fixed. Look, he's the best option we have, but I have some doubts. That he doesn't KNOW that the vaccines hurt more than they helped... Is Very Sad, Really.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Dobrien 1 year, 2 months ago
          I was immediately on to Fauci and Gates and very vocal on this board going back to the start. I was like the Lone Ranger warning not to take the jab. I was a minority then , but not today. That said , We do not have the same information Trump has. Could he have made a mistake and believed the entire medical community? Or did he speed up a more sinister plan ? Time will tell.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ Abaco 1 year, 2 months ago
      Unless he comes out against the vaccine for a coronavirus (still something that's never been accomplished after decades of trying) I'm not going to vote for him. I'm getting old and crotchety and my tolerance for bullshit has lowered to zero...
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by mccannon01 1 year, 2 months ago
        LOL! What you have to do is get a whiff of the BS of all candidates and vote for the one least offensive. Can't decide? Then you may as well stay home.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Dobrien 1 year, 2 months ago
          If you can’t see that Trump has been the best President ever , including a Great Ronald Reagan
          I am wasting my time on this platform.
          Anyone that would not vote for Trump again is aiding and abetting the enemy. Period.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by mccannon01 1 year, 2 months ago
            Trump isn't perfect, IMHO, but I voted for him twice and will again if he's still running in 2024. Yes, he is likely the best President in my lifetime or at least neck and neck with Reagan. Ronald Reagan had to put up with a lot of heat, but Trump was assaulted with a viciousness never seen before. One of my main reasons for voting for Trump this time around is I believe he has learned a lot from his past mistakes, especially in the personnel department, and will correct them. We shall see, hopefully.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo