If you’re going to “litter” plants onto someone else’s property, your reasoning for what plants to plant needs to be immaculate.
That doesn’t have to be a big complicated thing. Plant local wildflowers, from low weed content seed sources. Plant common imported plants like you find at the local nursery. Don’t pick random shit that’s invasive, or has poor nutrition that starves local insects. Don’t jump fences, think really hard about if you want to be taking things away like trash rather than relocating it on the property.
I really was not expecting to read Henry George's name when I opened that wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_of_Philosophy_and_Econo...
https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/your-book-review-progress-a...
Well said.
But yes, we should all be re-reading Progress and Poverty (1879), as our world shares many similarities.
As cool as it sounds to just whimsically plant flowers, vegetables, and trees everywhere, this does create problems for people. Just because someone has property and you don't doesn't mean you have a divine right to tell them what to do with it. It could literally be owned by an old granny who is trying to sell it with the least amount of headaches, or someone who intends to build on it as soon as they save enough money to do so.
Swap land with housing and you get something that has been going on for some time over here: homebuilders receiving government funding to make lots and lots of new homes then after they're finished letting them empty to keep homes prices high by reducing the offer compared to demand. This goes on for years, sometimes even forever until either they rot or become refuge for squatters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwdjtwsRtRE
Also Greening The Desert:
Not in Michigan it isn't. It's a criminal offense, punishable by fines and jail time.
"Bitcoin is Land" (2013) - 8 points https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7494583
I find it just as much of a violation - a much more egregious violation - to let land go to shit in areas where people live, unmanaged and blighted, with no regard for the people that actually inhabit that space. No, I'm not making a legal argument in a court of law here.
Would be vandalism if I hit somebody's with a bat in their back?.
And if I destroy their back seeding kudzu in their home, for them to remove it for the rest of their lives?
What If I seed flowering thistle?.
Seed bombs are a moronic trend from people without gardens that are playing to be gardeners, without a clue of the responsibility of keeping a collection of life beings.
Sounds fun right :)
>We can only build infrastructure such as railways and highways because we collectively decided...
Therefore a landowner cannot build without collective approval? I disagree. Obviously a single individual can improve land and create value independently of a collective.
Another popular claim is that property only exists because of state enforcement. Again, a single individual can enter a frontier and improve land. This is often accompanied by the claim that the state exists to enforce property ownership. Clearly one must preclude the other. If property ownership does not exist, there is no motive for creation of the state.
If we go back to basics we find that academics have already covered this territory. Improvement of unutilized land is often cited as the origin of ownership. While many will make arguments about the virtues of collectivism, that is beyond the scope of the specific origins of land ownership. These are generally arguments premised on, "The ends justify the means".
private property should be whatever the owner decides it is
I have always wanted to do something like this actually, hampered only by the fact that I suck at gardening.