So if I want to build a house on some land I only need to pay a builder?

 

I suppose acknowledging 1 of his 3 points is a start.

 

The other two are irrelevant points because I am talking about the rights associated with 'owning' the property (and their cost) not the bricks and mortar (cost).

I don't know how many times I have to explain this.

Land can be traded with no dwelling built upon it (for those who need concrete examples). It has a cash value, ergo that is what I am talking about.

 

I find this thread highly amusing in that an individual is prepared to dedicate a good chunk of his time slating the rental market when he rents a propery himself

Go buy yourself a tent and find a field

 

Been thinking about the land situation today whilst at work.
Who and when decided that the land that's always been there belongs to them?

The king of whatever Kingdom owned everything and he could give it to whoever he pleased, so down the centuries it's gradually been given to noblemen who in turn give it to lesser noblemen and eventually they sell it to the lower order.

All land is declared by whoever might have found it, pillaged, conquered, or inherited it. It is then their choice to sell it.

Oh, the King in question was a Socialist

 

Yep the irony is he'd be homeless sleeping on spikes in doorways if it wasn't for landlords.

 

You truly are a strange individual. Constantly bemoaning what is fundamentally a system which has been in place for centuries in one form or another.

 

technically the Crown (AKA the Queen) owns all the land in the UK

during WW2 the Crown commandeered over a 3rd of the UK's land for the MOD use, Airfield etc

it paid no rent - because it owns the Land

 

Now, yes.
But it goes back to the Romans.

 

well I posted on a previous thread how the North American Indians gave the new settlers land (in exchange for whisky and guns), because they had no concept of Land ownership

how can buy and sell something that has always been there and will always be there - was their view

it was soon changed when the settlers fenced of said land and shot any trespassing injuns

 

It's this stuff called money. Cars, buildings, undeveloped plots of land, biros, pints of beer, furry dice and all manner of other things are traded between their current owners (however they might have come into possession of such things), and people who want to own them. The two parties agree on a mutually acceptable price, exchange money to that value, and ownership is transferred from one to the other.

ps
In response to your previous reply to one of my posts, where did I ever say that the only legal or practical form of living arrangement is or should be to live in rented accommodation? You've heard of tents, haven't you?

 

You can just set up a tent where you want and live there?

 

That's irrelevant. The question was whether rented accommodation is the only form of living arrangement. I'm not interested in debating any other point

 

Back in early eighties I worked with/ got some painting /decorating instruction from guy who championed this ethic, had his hair like north America Indian and belonged to some society for it all ( proper wigwams of weekend and all )

Lived on council estate, good bloke - course he didn't own a thing


My great grand father was pit prop engineer inspector most Yorkshire. He spent time / disappeared with indians on trip to that part of the world for months, some photos hopefully still with my aunt

 

Very good

 

To be fair Joe I reckon there would be quite a few places around the country where you could probably pitch a tent for free.

 

In the sense that all land in the UK is owned by someone then renting is the only option unless you buy.

 

You're quite welcome to pitch your tent in my field amongst the sheep, free of any rent.

Just so long as you $hit in a bucket and take it away with you.

 

This is only true if you choose to abide by the morally indefensible construct that accommodation in anything other than a building of permanent engineered construction is no accommodation at all.

The more enlightened among us are fully aware that alternative arrangements exist

 

Dude - do you have learning difficulties?

 

Here you go Joe (is it?)

http://www.ukhippy.com/stuff/forumdi...omadic-Living?

Boom. Done. Next topic ?

 

I was trying to highlight the fact that there is an IMPOSED cost placed on dwellings (if you like) in the UK.

Land is free...given by nature...but we have to pay someone for it.

 

No **** sherlock?

 

You have to pay to "pitch a tent" ???

F**k, I owe WHSmiths a lot of money for all the times I've perused a copy of Nuts in their establishments and ending up pitching a tent!

PS any chance we could stop the pis*ing contest and get back to the topic at hand, please??

 

http://m.mic.com/articles/92463/here...omeless-spikes

 

Would that really keep you dry in a driving south westerly

They have same weather as us I think

 

In London/uk somebody would break it in no time.

 

I've never seen anything so ridiculous in my life and the article is nauseating with its misplaced self congratulation.

 

As above, if that bench was installed in London where you can lift the back up to provide a roof, some vandals would yank it off it's hindges.

 

Nice to see a city with a conscience unlike London and its greedy self serving inhabitants!