Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (237043)	7/18/2007 7:14:07 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Respond to of 281500

Well said.

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (237043)	7/18/2007 7:57:34 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

You aren't giving anything away if you do it when you are dead!! Go on, expand it to 100% now, and give it all away, not just a conservation easement. A conservation easement in some ways is better than giving it away. It means the land will always be restricted in use to support the conservation goals of the NA tribe. Further, for many buyers it does not actually decrease my property value. I have 3/8 of a mile of river running through my property, and the conservation easement protects a generous buffer on both banks. In return, they restored the riparian vegetation on all that land, and I now have a very beautiful property. It looks like some hypocrisy. You want OTHER people to give away land they bought fair and square 100 years ago. Sure, you don't call it "giving it away", you call it "putting the Palestinians in charge". Rhodesians put Mugabe in charge of land bought 100s of years ago. And businesses bought 5 years ago. A small fraction of Palestine was purchased by Jews. Much more was simply given to them in the Partition by the British. In Rhodesia, it was the same story. It is in the interest of any sane person who purchases real property to consider whether the property might well be viewed as stolen by others. If so, the purchase might not be prudent. One hundred years ago, people of various ethnic groups could be safely ignored, provided the government was some other ethnic group. Still true in many places, but not true in places that want to be viewed as Western Democracies. If you wail that this is somehow grossly unfair, too bad!