Give every US citizen 2 acres of land.

It can't possibly be 'per person'. It would have to be 'per ten people', or similar. Anything less is outrageously profligate. Other than that, it's a very sound idea.

Wait til the Lefty Elites hear about it though .. they heart their big city soft livins!

 

Why you want this & who benefits & how.

You've clarified somewhat since, however.

 

An acre per family (minimum 4) is more workable, and absolutely sufficient to raise all the food needed.

 

On the contrary, the current model has failed utterly.

 

Waves

 

What's the diff? Someone still has to decide who gets that housing. Where I live, middle class people who simply don't like working, qualify for 'affordable housing'. That's what happens when you predicate eligibility on income.

 

South or North? Because North Indians have 'white' skin. Food is better, too

 

I don't think the OP is talking about commercial farming. They're talking about subsistence farming. That's VERY different.

 

Hey .. that's mine!

Find your own. How about a nice swamp front in Florida?

 

What .. just because they ask?

 

You MOW half an acre?

Are you quite well in the brainpan, Love?

 

Oh yeah, let us reduce 320 million Americans to subsistence level existence.

 

I'll play!

I would make those who fail (by choice, not bad weather or drought etc) to use the land for its intended purpose within 6 months, ineligible for life. They get to take their chances with the landless.

That's the only equitable way to do it. Slack cutting for certain people or certain 'excuses', would be entirely inequitable.

 

Okay, don't. Let's keep on doing what we're doing now. Let's see how that plays out over the next 25 years.

 

Maybe government could build a new city for the poor?

Out somewhere in a currently relatively remote area where land prices are very low.

Trying to put the poor in high price cities probably isn't going to work out too well, since there's a shortage of space for housing, it would just drive up the rents for everyone else.

 

1) Those who demonstrate the commitment (and measure up within a 6 month trial period).

2) Those who are committed enough to acquire them.

3) Commitment to learning.

4) Because everything else so far has been a flaming failure. Capitalism works for a bit, but then the environment goes to crap.

 

Yes, LOCAL. Renters aren't invested, that's why they focus on national, or even international, politics. It's a huge problem.

 

That's exactly what investors want you to think. They want to keep you enslaved to their wallets.

 

What is wrong with what we're doing now? Almost all Americans live so many levels above the subsistence level that they don't even know what the term means.

 

I like this discussion topic. When the housing crisis hit, there were enough empty homes to give every homeless person a house, with plenty of homes leftover. We continue to treat the uber wealthy as if they are casino owners, and the deck is stacked against the rest of us. Anyone not in the top 10% will get into poverty far more often then they break out and become part of the 10%. This is by design. The house always wins. I'm no socialist nor communist, and I think people should have to work for what they get, but, if they are drugged and kneed at the starting gate, blaming them for not coming in first is just a convenient way to get the lower-middle class to blame the lower class, and the upper-middle class to blame the lower class AND the lower-middle class.

Except for the part where it never really happened, yes. https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/forty-acres-and-mule/#:~:text=The phrase “forty acres and,cultivating land abandoned by whites.

When I started working from home in 2003, I was one of 100 in my company. Now there are tens of thousands of us, expedited a bit by the disease. We went from 15K to 60K in a matter of weeks. They've stated that if a supervisor & employee agree that productivity and moral aren't being harmed, they want all WAH to stay WAH indefinitely. We save money, space, oil, road deterioration, accidents and the need to commute. I can move to Montana and do my job as equally well as I do in S Florida. I like the variety, so that wouldn't work for me, but it would and will work for many, many people. I encourage it.

 

How am I "enslaved"? I already own a house and one hell of a lot more than two acres of land.

 

I disagree. Once you sell a nationalized asset like that, you can never get it back.

Maybe government could rent out these properties, with long-term or lifetime leases.
That would provide a consistent steady form of additional revenue government so desperately needs.

Don't sell the farm, look at the long-term.

 

That housing (in my country) is now being accessed by people who deliberately lower their income so they can have cheap inner city housing. Not to mention 'black economy' people with well hidden money (often migrants, I'm sorry to say). Then there are the elderly who simply choose not to live with family. Very few bona fide "poor with no options", are actually living in those places. That's Progressive failure to care, in action.

 

Not you personally .. general renters.

 

I agree. But it's unsustainable.