After searching for different ways people live, with and without owning land, as well as the misfortunes of both groups, I have not come to a satisfactory conclusion to my question of whether land should be owned. The query is more a philosophical belief than a political controversy, especially in modern times. Owning property certainly has advantages, especially when it pertains to safety and security, as well as allowing people to utilize the opportunities presented, such as farming or producing material goods. These advantages certainly make living without owning property appealing, even though there are many who do so everyday whether they are homeless or not. There are definite drawbacks to being a landowner, like taxation, community and government restrictions to name a few, however these shortcomings are a small price to pay for the comfort and convenience of a homestead.

The variety of sources and resources pertaining to the subject I chose is an especially difficult task to research, the sub-topics and relevant information is a sea of data to easily drown in. With the posts I made, I felt they had something to contribute to the subject. Homelessness, individuals building their own homes without the benefit of land ownership as well as the problems a landowner faces .Though it is a subject many would argue with, I still want to buy a piece of land and build a palace. 

What happens when there is no place to live? I can build my own place to live, but I may be taxed, even though I didn’t purchase land. What about if I made some horrible monstrosity nobody wanted to see? Should I allow other people to affect the development of my dream? You know what, ill build a boat. I can live on it, go wherever, and its my “land”.

One of the issues involved with the ownership of land is homelessness. When it comes to homelessness, I have some experience. I have been living in my truck since July, and only recently found an apartment. This is not the only time I have had to endure the hardships of indigence, and it may not be the last. There are many resources to assist a person in need such as the food bank and shelters where you can get a shower and a spot to sleep out of the cold, however I leave that to folks in greater need, or without the abilities I possess. I am able bodied, therefore I can work. This is the main reason for topic of my blog .
I am trying to explore various ways a person can live without having to buy land or rent from someone. There are folks living in sewers, under bridges, in their cars, anywhere that will shelter them from the elements. Why do people have to live this way? There are generally multiple reasons a person succumbs to the hardships of living in the streets. Mental disorders, substance abuse, and unemployment are major causes for homelessness. How can people overcome this? Low income housing helps for those who have the means, but there are many who can't even afford that.
One organization, Occupy Madison, provides a solution to such a dilemma. The organization builds small 96 square foot homes with basic amenities to house individuals in the harsh weather of Wisconsin. However the tiny homes have to be placed on land by charitable organizations or churches. This is a nice approach, especially since the person who will reside in the tiny home helps build it.
Yet there are other cases that are without resolution, such as when a Huntington indigent camp was razed by local police under orders of Starlight Building Corporation. The unfortunate residents of the tent city, most of which were illegal immigrants, were left in the cold of a New England winter. There are shelters and programs that aid people in need, but most are for legal residents. I understand that the land was owned, and the landowners didn't want people living there, but isn't there a better way to do such a thing? Couldn't they have tried to find a way to house the people before turning them outThis is why I have difficulty coming to terms with how land is owned. Alas, that is the way the world turns.

Providing or finding a home can be difficult, with problems in economies, restrictions in land space, even with the availability of materials. People have to envision a variety of ways to live in the world when there is a shortage of funds, such as the shanty towns of India and Brazil, or when there is a limitation of resources and building materials, such as the mud and dung huts in the Zulu and San African tribes. Often the result of the endeavors can be bizarre, beautiful and ingenious as in the cases of Richie 'Reishie' Sowa and Dai Haifei.

In December 2010, Dai Hafai, a young architect in China, built an egg shaped living quarters situated in the heart of downtown, right on the sidewalk. His motivations were due to the high cost of living in Beijing, and to avoid his parents from going into debt for over 200 years just to provide him with an apartment. The domicile, a 6 foot high, solar powered mobile cocoon, cost under $1000 to build.


Unfortunately he was forced to remove his innovative living quarters soon afterward, though the firm he worked at, as well as where the egg was parked in front of, volunteered to house the interesting living space.USA Today

Richie 'Reishie' Sowa constructed not one but two islands using recycled plastic bottles, plywood, mangrove trees and sand. The first island, dubbed Spiral island, floated in a lagoon near Puerto Aventuras, Mexico until a hurricane destroyed it in 2005. A second Spiral Island was built in 2007, in the waters of Isla Meieres in Mexico.


With access to whatever resources are available, anyone can provide a home for themselves imaginable. However there are major limitations, such as nature, and mankind. The ocean can provide rich resources if the people who involve themselves with such a dangerous element can prepare themselves for the ferocity and ever changing environment. The problems posed by mankind has more to do with occupation. Rarely since the time of Manifest Destiny has mankind been able to just stake a claim wherever desired. Property is owned, so a person can't live anywhere without having to pay, people are killed for trespassing, and vagrancy is a crime. So what happens to people when there is no place to go?Environment

"This we know: the earth does not belong to man, man belongs to the earth"

The main point of my blog is the idea whether land should be owned or not. Many people would argue with me over this simple question. Especially people that own homes or land. The idea isn't to take property away from anyone, just to highlight the many dilemmas from land being owned.

 



 Mankind has reached out from the cradle of civilization to grasp at the very edges of the map to pull itself up from the deepest darkest recesses of  primal decrepitude. The necessity to do so has been driven by survival since the dawn of mankind. EXPAND, REPRODUCE, CONQUER. Since then we as a race have grown to encompass to globe. There are many places we have not populated, mainly because it is very inhospitable, such as the Antarctic, however, our reach has barely been exceeded. Mankind continues to grow.

 

As of today, there are over 7 billion people on the planet. There is about 57 million square miles of land in the world. Granted there is adequate space to accommodate the populace, but that doesn't mean every inch of space should be taken. There are the natural areas, where wildlife exists, though mankind continues to encroach. Not to mention farms, which takes a considerable amount of space, and more is needed to provide for the ever increasing population. There are cities, overflowing with the multitudes residing within its urban sprawl, skyscrapers and suburbs spreading in all directions. With these are also the economic downfalls, climbing cost of living, and limitations to affordable places to reside.  At some point, there will be a tipping point, a critical mass, where mankind has exceeded its resources, and that point may be impending.

 

 "This we know: the earth does not belong to man, man belongs to the earth" Chief Seattle is attributed with writing this in a letter to President Pierce after the purchase of land from the Suquamish and the Duwamish tribes in 1855. The message of the letter is a discussion of the relationship between mankind and nature, and how humans should treat the world. I feel the quote addresses a pertinent issue, that the world really can't be owned.

 

 Since I was a child I have always wanted to get a place of my own. To purchase some property in the mountains, where I could build the home of my dreams that my family would always feel comfortable and safe. However I feel a twinge of guilt because of how I feel about Chief Seattle's quote and the acknowledgment of owning land, though it won't deter me from buying the land. More questions come to mind, especially regarding the population, the environment, and how we as a race can progress.

 

How can people live without the need to buy or rent land? Can it be done in a sanitary and environmentally friendly manner? What happens when people can't get the income to live in a home? What are the pitfalls of owning property? Where do we go from here? Can mankind expand to other planets, or into the ocean? How can we correct the mistakes of our pollution to the environment? I intend to explore the many issues these questions raise.