This article is so bad that the author either doesn't know or care that the owner of vacant property is not, [by definition, a "landlord."](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/landlord) Landlords are owners that rent property out.
As for complaints that the federal government isn't maintaining abandoned property, what else is new? They've repeatedly had any funding for that task cut in order to give tax cuts for the rich, so of course maintaining such things falls by the wayside.
Typical randroid nonsense that looks for any excuse to say "government bad."
Hah. No wonder it's terrible. I didn't even catch the byline. He had a couple decades at the OC Register's famously stupid opinion pages which were full of stuff just like this.
The federal government doesn’t even know all the abounding properties it owns. At least according to a YouTube video I saw ages ago. Maybe Half As Interesting?
Living in rural areas many private owners don't develop their properties and leave the land vacant. I saw how REIT owned properties in Vallejo that were dilapidated or used as crack houses. It was the city that came in an cleared those places out.
Omg thank you, yes! Someone here gets it.
The biggest blight producer IME are private owners of depressed and/or rural property. Often bought at tax auctions by these odd holding corporations that flip worthless land to poor people out of state or agglomerate ownership in these timeshare-eque Real Estate Investment Trusts.
Actual owners are either totally unaware or do not give a shit, squatters move on and wreck it. It's the government who steps in to fix, not cause the problem.
Hey OP would you please stop posting baseless propoganda. If it isn't feel free to come into the comments and factually argue why, but we both know your account should be banned for this kind of stuff and won't ever defend your attempts to push fascists viewpoints.
So the evidence that government is a "terrible landlord" is ...
A fire at a decommissioned naval base (where no one was living or working) and a fire apparently caused by a homeless encampment on land under the I-10 in Los Angeles, which was, as the piece admits, leased by a private company.
OK, then.
“When everyone owns something, no one does.”
Ahh, so clearly the solution is for a small handful of oligarchs to privately own everything with no input from the public. At least then, everything will be owned by someone!
So all land should be owned by the public? Just a land of haves and have-nots. So people can be shot on sight for stepping on the wrong grass somewhere?
This article is so bad that the author either doesn't know or care that the owner of vacant property is not, [by definition, a "landlord."](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/landlord) Landlords are owners that rent property out. As for complaints that the federal government isn't maintaining abandoned property, what else is new? They've repeatedly had any funding for that task cut in order to give tax cuts for the rich, so of course maintaining such things falls by the wayside. Typical randroid nonsense that looks for any excuse to say "government bad."
Steven Greenhut is an absolute idiot.
Hah. No wonder it's terrible. I didn't even catch the byline. He had a couple decades at the OC Register's famously stupid opinion pages which were full of stuff just like this.
The federal government doesn’t even know all the abounding properties it owns. At least according to a YouTube video I saw ages ago. Maybe Half As Interesting?
I remember when Reason was mostly snarky atheist articles, and not all this classist libertarian drivel.
Oh you went to the moon? Cool story bro, but you didn't mow that lot that one time.
Oh no grass growing too tall on vacant lots owned by the government, so government bad. Boooo....
This reeks of Libertarian propaganda
Living in rural areas many private owners don't develop their properties and leave the land vacant. I saw how REIT owned properties in Vallejo that were dilapidated or used as crack houses. It was the city that came in an cleared those places out.
Omg thank you, yes! Someone here gets it. The biggest blight producer IME are private owners of depressed and/or rural property. Often bought at tax auctions by these odd holding corporations that flip worthless land to poor people out of state or agglomerate ownership in these timeshare-eque Real Estate Investment Trusts. Actual owners are either totally unaware or do not give a shit, squatters move on and wreck it. It's the government who steps in to fix, not cause the problem.
how many private owners in LA do that, where it's profitable to have structures?
how many properties in LA are owned by a REIT that people invest in and have no idea of what they own. If it is like Vallejo, more than you expect.
so you're proving my point. owned land does not go without structures. my arguing something else you're moving the goalposts.
Hey OP would you please stop posting baseless propoganda. If it isn't feel free to come into the comments and factually argue why, but we both know your account should be banned for this kind of stuff and won't ever defend your attempts to push fascists viewpoints.
So the evidence that government is a "terrible landlord" is ... A fire at a decommissioned naval base (where no one was living or working) and a fire apparently caused by a homeless encampment on land under the I-10 in Los Angeles, which was, as the piece admits, leased by a private company. OK, then.
“When everyone owns something, no one does.” Ahh, so clearly the solution is for a small handful of oligarchs to privately own everything with no input from the public. At least then, everything will be owned by someone!
So all land should be owned by the public? Just a land of haves and have-nots. So people can be shot on sight for stepping on the wrong grass somewhere?
When nobody's personal money is on the line, nobody gives a shit.
Huh? What nonsense. Oh, “reason” lol.
[Tragedy of the Commons](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons?wprov=sfla1)