6 ms·

If they included governmental owners, it'd dwarf these private holdings. For example, the largest landowner is really the United States Federal government: 640

If they included governmental owners, it'd dwarf these private holdings. For example, the largest landowner is really the United States Federal government: 640 million acres.

BitwiseFool 5y ago
While true, I feel like government owned land doesn't really count.
- syshum 5y ago
  Why?
  - tyingq 5y ago
    Not who you're replying to, but the US Govt does own a lot of land that wouldn't be useful to anyone else. Some rural and desert plots sell for less than $1000/acre.
    - syshum 5y ago
      While that may be true in some cases, the US Govt also owns a huge amount of productive land that are today used under lease for grazing and other purposes, or could be used by others for purposes that the US Government forbids. I am not sure what the exact break down of useful vs non-useful is, but I know most of the land in my state that is owned by the government could be used for other things. Keep in mind to we are not just talking Bureau of Land Management, but also Park Service, All Federal Agencies many of which have abandoned, or under used facilities in many towns and cities through out the US, Military who owns large sections of land that are non-active bases, etc etc etc Several states have even attempted various law suits because the federal government is preventing economic development of the land
  - BitwiseFool 5y ago
    Primarily because it seems logical that the government would own the largest amount of land in a country like the United States. No individual or institution would ever come close to the sheer amount of land the Federal Government obtained by treaty or by conquest.
paulryanrogers 5y ago
Sadly voters cannot yet influence how non-governmental owners choose to use the significant land holdings. And increasingly voters cannot even overcome the outsized influence of rich individuals and companies and their lobbies on how government owned land gets used.
- HNfriend234 5y ago
  Voters shouldn't be able to influence private landowning anyways since it violates private property rights. The whole point of owning land is so you can decide what to do with the land. If you want to decide what to do with someone's private property then work a deal with them instead.
  - syshum 5y ago
    Increasingly it is apparent that the US is going to have to learn how bad socialism is in a first hand manner, increasingly few people alive in the US fled the horror of past attempts at socialism and our "education" system love to white wash those past attempts as "not real socialism™" thus its rise in modern politics as being considered a viable economic path.
  - xyzzyx 5y ago
    Of course government can decide private property law. Slaves used to be private property. And you can't do whatever you want once you own a piece of land, see environmental laws etc.
- codingdave 5y ago
  Sure they can - all land is controlled by land use regulations, zoning regulations and other laws and regs. Your local elected officials are in charge of changes to such things. By all means, vote for the people getting into those offices, and get engaged with local governance. Especially in the more rural areas, where the large land holdings tend to fall, there will be a smaller electorate, and the local community can have a significant impact on local decisions. For federal land, significant projects are open for public comments, and they absolutely respond to the people who live in the area. I've seen numerous development projects proposed by the rich get shot down after the community got involved through the comment process.
vondur 5y ago
Yeah, in some states, the majority of land is owned by the Federal Government. (Nevada and Idaho for example)

If they included governmental owners, it'd dwarf these private holdings. For example, the largest landowner is really the United States Federal government: 640 million acres.

BitwiseFool 5y ago

While true, I feel like government owned land doesn't really count.

syshum 5y ago
Why?
- tyingq 5y ago
  Not who you're replying to, but the US Govt does own a lot of land that wouldn't be useful to anyone else. Some rural and desert plots sell for less than $1000/acre.
  - syshum 5y ago
    While that may be true in some cases, the US Govt also owns a huge amount of productive land that are today used under lease for grazing and other purposes, or could be used by others for purposes that the US Government forbids. I am not sure what the exact break down of useful vs non-useful is, but I know most of the land in my state that is owned by the government could be used for other things. Keep in mind to we are not just talking Bureau of Land Management, but also Park Service, All Federal Agencies many of which have abandoned, or under used facilities in many towns and cities through out the US, Military who owns large sections of land that are non-active bases, etc etc etc Several states have even attempted various law suits because the federal government is preventing economic development of the land
- BitwiseFool 5y ago
  Primarily because it seems logical that the government would own the largest amount of land in a country like the United States. No individual or institution would ever come close to the sheer amount of land the Federal Government obtained by treaty or by conquest.

paulryanrogers 5y ago

Sadly voters cannot yet influence how non-governmental owners choose to use the significant land holdings. And increasingly voters cannot even overcome the outsized influence of rich individuals and companies and their lobbies on how government owned land gets used.

HNfriend234 5y ago
Voters shouldn't be able to influence private landowning anyways since it violates private property rights. The whole point of owning land is so you can decide what to do with the land. If you want to decide what to do with someone's private property then work a deal with them instead.
- syshum 5y ago
  Increasingly it is apparent that the US is going to have to learn how bad socialism is in a first hand manner, increasingly few people alive in the US fled the horror of past attempts at socialism and our "education" system love to white wash those past attempts as "not real socialism™" thus its rise in modern politics as being considered a viable economic path.
- xyzzyx 5y ago
  Of course government can decide private property law. Slaves used to be private property. And you can't do whatever you want once you own a piece of land, see environmental laws etc.
codingdave 5y ago
Sure they can - all land is controlled by land use regulations, zoning regulations and other laws and regs. Your local elected officials are in charge of changes to such things. By all means, vote for the people getting into those offices, and get engaged with local governance. Especially in the more rural areas, where the large land holdings tend to fall, there will be a smaller electorate, and the local community can have a significant impact on local decisions. For federal land, significant projects are open for public comments, and they absolutely respond to the people who live in the area. I've seen numerous development projects proposed by the rich get shot down after the community got involved through the comment process.

vondur 5y ago

Yeah, in some states, the majority of land is owned by the Federal Government. (Nevada and Idaho for example)