|
Pages: [1]
|
 |
|
Author
|
Topic: Land ownership (Read 1057 times)
|
Zanthius
Enlightened
 Offline
Posts: 941
|
I am thinking that in order to preserve lots of biodiversity, we should only allow humans to own land in specific areas. I am also wondering if there should be a maximum amount of landmass each individual can own, or if there should be a progressive land-tax which increases the more land you own. This is a bit tricky, since not all landmass is equally fertile and so on. I am thinking that the land-tax somehow must be correlated to the market value of the land. Or maybe it could be correlated to the amount of sunlight hitting a piece of land.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: August 05, 2017, 12:49:45 pm by Zanthius »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 3873
We did. You did. Yes we can. No.
|
We already do that - nature preserves are huge. The main problem is keeping people from going in and poaching/farming/logging/otherwise screwing up those areas. It's largely not enforced, especially in the most crucial areas.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Scalare
*Many bubbles*
Offline
Posts: 245
|
I don't think this really matters anymore, by 2100 we will have an out of control greenhouse effect due to the political actions that the USA is taking right now.
We might get some biodiversity but it will all go to shit anyway. So why bother?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3873
We did. You did. Yes we can. No.
|
Pessimism that strong is a bit much. If you really stop bothering, and the USA gets its act basically together, then you're the problem. And it's not particularly unlikely that we will.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3873
We did. You did. Yes we can. No.
|
That was a bit too compressed for me to know what you're talking about.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
|
|
|
|
