• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

How Joe plans to end private property ownership.

m1west

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
Been doing some reading with too many sources to list. It started under the Obama administration, then shelved under Trump. Now Uncle Joe it has resurrected and expanded upon it. How many of you know about Agenda 21 and Agenda 30? Seems uncle Joe plans to force suburban and rural towns to change there zoning laws or have there government $$ cut off. There are to be no more building permits issued for single family homes only multi family. The cities and towns would be forced to upgrade infrastructure to handle the increased population. Joe says that living in the suburbs should be an option for inner city dwellers and they currently can't afford to live in these places, that makes it racist. So in the COVID bailout there are billions of dollars to make it happen. To expand on the plan they are going to increase the amount of land that is owned by the federal government thru accusation and using emanate domain. Then make most all public lands declared wilderness areas that are off limits to people. So if you are living in a small town in Indiana, Ohio or anywhere for that matter, you could have your neighborhood hollowed out in the middle with stacked and packed government housing installed. That would be act one, act two would be to have your property taxes go through the roof to pay for it, forcing many to sell or lose there home and move into one of those. Are you a farmer or rancher that uses or leases public lands, that may change in the future, as well as hunting, hiking or anything else.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
It seems the new order is not so much that the rich should pay their fair share but that the elite in OUR government should retain control and the citizens should lose their rights to property. The right to property is the fundamental keystone on the foundation of our Democracy over the eminent rights of the King, the rulers, the government. If what M1west purports is true then the Great Experiment of our founders has failed.

And the great expense of blood and treasure by literally millions who suffered in the attempt to preserve and protect, and nourish that experiment was a waste. Whilst I can see that as an outcome, I for one cannot accept it. I know of far too many who will but I also know many who will continue the struggle to maintain the attempt at self governance. My plan is to be counted amongst the latter.
 

m1west

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
My computers skills suck, but I encourage everyone to research it. They can not allow generational wealth any longer and property rights are the vehicle that get most of us there.
 

m1west

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
Everyone needs to know this. It will change the way you live. To those that voted for Biden or didn't vote because Trump is crass, this is what can happen. And I wish a big FU to those that did.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2075.jpg
    IMG_2075.jpg
    114.8 KB · Views: 5
  • IMG_2077.jpg
    IMG_2077.jpg
    89.7 KB · Views: 5
  • IMG_2075.jpg
    IMG_2075.jpg
    114.8 KB · Views: 4
  • IMG_2077.jpg
    IMG_2077.jpg
    89.7 KB · Views: 4
  • IMG_2078.jpg
    IMG_2078.jpg
    99.8 KB · Views: 4
  • IMG_2079.jpg
    IMG_2079.jpg
    88.8 KB · Views: 5

Ceee

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Joe says that living in the suburbs should be an option for inner city dwellers and they currently can't afford to live in these places, that makes it racist.
I think that's a bunch of nonsense.
My computers skills suck, but I encourage everyone to research it.
I looked for more info, and there doesn't seem to be a lot out there. If anybody else can find anything, I'd like to read more about it.

I did find this:

The Biden Principles for Housing

While the housing challenges Americans face in different rural and urban communities across the country may vary, every American in every zip code should have access to housing that is:

  • Affordable – taking up no more than 30% of income so they have money left over to meet other needs;
  • Stable – providing families with the consistency they need to maintain jobs, perform well in school, and develop social networks necessary for well-being;
  • Safe and healthy – protecting families from environmental and social risks from polluted air to lead contamination to gun violence;
  • Accessible – meeting the needs of individuals with disabilities so they can live in their communities;
  • Energy efficient and resilient – reducing our greenhouse gas emissions and withstanding the impacts of climate change; and
  • Located near good schools and with a reasonable commute to their jobs.
That site looked like it was looking for donations, so I'm not comfortable posting the site info.

Sometimes, okay most times, I don't know what Biden is thinking. He just seems to be jumping off with a new plan every time the American people turn around with absolutely no plan for how to implement it in a sane way.
 

300 H and H

Bronze Member
GOLD Site Supporter
Sometimes, okay most times, I don't know what Biden is thinking. He just seems to be jumping off with a new plan every time the American people turn around with absolutely no plan for how to implement it in a sane way.
Old Joe will just keep talking about a plan for what ever the question, or the issue is.
Trouble is that is just about as far as it will go. Action? Well lets just say this is not Biden's strong suit.
Unless it is to bail out Hunter in that Ukrainian deal lol...
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
I think that's a bunch of nonsense.

I looked for more info, and there doesn't seem to be a lot out there. If anybody else can find anything, I'd like to read more about it.

I did find this:

The Biden Principles for Housing

While the housing challenges Americans face in different rural and urban communities across the country may vary, every American in every zip code should have access to housing that is:

  • Affordable – taking up no more than 30% of income so they have money left over to meet other needs;
  • Stable – providing families with the consistency they need to maintain jobs, perform well in school, and develop social networks necessary for well-being;
  • Safe and healthy – protecting families from environmental and social risks from polluted air to lead contamination to gun violence;
  • Accessible – meeting the needs of individuals with disabilities so they can live in their communities;
  • Energy efficient and resilient – reducing our greenhouse gas emissions and withstanding the impacts of climate change; and
  • Located near good schools and with a reasonable commute to their jobs.
That site looked like it was looking for donations, so I'm not comfortable posting the site info.

Sometimes, okay most times, I don't know what Biden is thinking. He just seems to be jumping off with a new plan every time the American people turn around with absolutely no plan for how to implement it in a sane way.
The "Biden Principle for affordable housing" doesn't explain how it is to be accomplished. Are people to have affordable rent or affordable purchase prices? The difference is important.

It is key.

Always keep in mind that Socialism and private citizen property ownership are not compatible. There is simply no way to construct an ability for the two concepts to co-exist. They are fundamentally antagonistic.

It is the ownership of property and the ability to pass it from generation to generation that made the USA unique at it's founding. If an individual cannot own the property he pays for, then he is a renter/lessee with no personal rights to earned wealth.
That is the foundational keystone of our republic.
 
Last edited:

m1west

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
The "Biden Principle for affordable housing" doesn't explain how it is to be accomplished. Are people to have affordable rent or affordable purchase prices? The difference is important.

It is key.

Always keep in mind that Socialism and private citizen property ownership are not compatible. There is simply no way to construct an ability for the two concepts to co-exist. They are fundamentally antagonistic.

It is the ownership of property and the ability to pass it from generation to generation that made the USA unique at it's founding. If an individual cannot own the property he pays for, then he is a renter/lessee with no personal rights to earned wealth.
That is the foundational keystone of our republic.
The "Biden Principle for affordable housing" doesn't explain how it is to be accomplished. Are people to have affordable rent or affordable purchase prices? The difference is important.

It is key.

Always keep in mind that Socialism and private citizen property ownership are not compatible. There is simply no way to construct an ability for the two concepts to co-exist. They are fundamentally antagonistic.

It is the ownership of property and the ability to pass it from generation to generation that made the USA unique at it's founding. If an individual cannot own the property he pays for, then he is a renter/lessee with no personal rights to earned wealth.
That is the foundational keystone of our republic.
Research the equality act and the Biden 30 by 30 plan and you will see how they are going to get it done.
 

300 H and H

Bronze Member
GOLD Site Supporter
Were they have room to do this, there are not nearly enough jobs.
The people they will bring into the housing will trash the housing, and ruin property values for miles.
There will never be stability because these people do not know how to attain it, much less maintain it.
Reducing green house emissions pretty much means throw cost competitiveness out the window.
Schools that once taught will become indoctrination centers.

Yup old Joe the f'ing idiot at work. And his plans will never work as always.
 

300 H and H

Bronze Member
GOLD Site Supporter

IS BIDEN AFTER YOUR FARM LAND? | The 30/30 Executive Order and Biden Tax Laws​




Yanasa TV

74.1K subscribers

Joe Biden recently announced plans to turn 30% of the United States back into conservation land. Currently 14% of land in the United States is protected by conservation, over 70% of land is privately owned. Of course those numbers don't include the amount of land that is actually in conservation in some shape or form. Many farms have acreage on their land for wildlife use. 52% of the United States land is used for Agricultural Purposes. However this large number is constantly being driven down by the fastest growing land use "Urban Areas." Urban area is the largest growing use in recent years while special land uses grew substantially in the late 1970's. With tightening agricultural resources, it seems highly unlikely that many farmers would find an economic benefit to collecting conservation payouts over agricultural production. Additionally, Biden's 30/30 executive order states the desire to make more conservation land available to the general public. Public accessibility is generally unpopular with private land owners and their liability insurance providers. So to reach this lofty goal of 30% Conservation by 2030 the Biden Administration will need to implement administrative direction that forces an outcome. As we know from 40 executive orders the Administration has no reservations about forcibly acting on their own accord. Just like the Dodd Frank Bill caused a consequential disruption in the financial industry, Biden's tax proposals may have a similar impact.
 

NorthernRedneck

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
Sounds similar to what has been going on for years where I live. The multi family low income units have been popping up all around the city in all neighborhoods. Seems like the bigger the unit in that area, the higher the crime rate in that area. Property taxes raise to pay for the units meanwhile property values decrease due to increased crime rates. The neighborhood we were in when we still lived in the city used to be a nicer area until back in the 80s they began erecting row housing to provide rent geared to income homes for less fortunate. What happened was that crime rates increased. Murders in the area increased. Resale values decreased.

Even the upscale new development neighborhoods in the city have begun to go that route. My parents had built a brand new house a few years ago in a new development neighborhood. Let's just say that they spent $500000 to build a 2500 square foot house with 5 bedrooms and 3 bathrooms. Two doors down, the city bought a corner lot and put up a 4 plex apartment with rent geared to income. My parents house was now worth $350000.

For this reason, I'm so glad we bought where we did. It's 12 minutes from the city in a small village. We have 6 acres down a quiet side road and our property backs up to the fairgrounds which means there won't be any future development of those rent geared to income units next door.
 

m1west

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
Sounds similar to what has been going on for years where I live. The multi family low income units have been popping up all around the city in all neighborhoods. Seems like the bigger the unit in that area, the higher the crime rate in that area. Property taxes raise to pay for the units meanwhile property values decrease due to increased crime rates. The neighborhood we were in when we still lived in the city used to be a nicer area until back in the 80s they began erecting row housing to provide rent geared to income homes for less fortunate. What happened was that crime rates increased. Murders in the area increased. Resale values decreased.

Even the upscale new development neighborhoods in the city have begun to go that route. My parents had built a brand new house a few years ago in a new development neighborhood. Let's just say that they spent $500000 to build a 2500 square foot house with 5 bedrooms and 3 bathrooms. Two doors down, the city bought a corner lot and put up a 4 plex apartment with rent geared to income. My parents house was now worth $350000.

For this reason, I'm so glad we bought where we did. It's 12 minutes from the city in a small village. We have 6 acres down a quiet side road and our property backs up to the fairgrounds which means there won't be any future development of those rent geared to income units next door.
Its the same program that is now being instituted here, it gets its roots from agenda 21 and agenda 30. I also live on an acreage and damn glad that I do. If they wanted to I guess they could change the zoning and buy up land and do it in the rural areas also, but would be more difficult for them due to infrastructure. What I am hearing about here again is putting meters on private water wells. I am glad you posted, seems folks here believe it could never happen in the US. News flash its happening.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
Its the same program that is now being instituted here, it gets its roots from agenda 21 and agenda 30. I also live on an acreage and damn glad that I do. If they wanted to I guess they could change the zoning and buy up land and do it in the rural areas also, but would be more difficult for them due to infrastructure. What I am hearing about here again is putting meters on private water wells. I am glad you posted, seems folks here believe it could never happen in the US. News flash its happening.
Meters on water wells, yeah that can happen. In some parts of Colorado you cannot collect the rain that falls on your roof.

I can see regulation of wholesale water use for agriculture wherein the pumps are draining the aquafers dry. But a well?

I have potable water coming from a spring. Actually five springs. Is that next?

This one is the largest supporting a small stream of 55%F cool water for 365 days a year.



IMG_3946.JPG

Over 6 gallons a minute of Sweet, pure water. Unfortunately, it is 2500 feet away and 220 feet below my country house.
 
Last edited:

m1west

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
Meters on water wells, yeah that can happen. In some parts of Colorado you cannot collect the rain that falls on your roof.

I can see regulation of wholesale water use for agriculture wherein the pumps are draining the aquafers dry. But a well?

I have potable water coming from a spring. Actually five springs. Is that next?

This one is the largest supporting a small stream of 55%F cool water for 365 days a year.

I have a spring at my mountain property that also puts out around 5 gallons a minute. It will be hard to meter it as they don't know it exists or where its at.

View attachment 136972

Over 6 gallons a minute of Sweet, pure water. Unfortunately, it is 2500 feet away and 220 feet below my country house.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
.....I have a spring at my mountain property that also puts out around 5 gallons a minute. It will be hard to meter it as they don't know it exists or where its at.....


And that is why we have these remote properties.
 

300 H and H

Bronze Member
GOLD Site Supporter
.....I have a spring at my mountain property that also puts out around 5 gallons a minute. It will be hard to meter it as they don't know it exists or where its at.....


And that is why we have these remote properties.

How to Make a "Water Ram" off-grid Water Pump, requires no electricity​


Maybe you might find this interesting? Lol
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter

How to Make a "Water Ram" off-grid Water Pump, requires no electricity​


Maybe you might find this interesting? Lol
Thanks but I already know that technology. Saw it in action in 1965.
A solar system works better.

Not the issue here.
The problem is 220 feet of elevation lift and 2500 feet of pipe laid 24"-30" down in Ozark rock.
 
Last edited:

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
It would be interesting to know what exactly the government means by the term "affordable housing"

Should someone who cannot maintain employment be able to "buy" a house on Food stamps and welfare payments?
Or are we talking about "rent?"


Seems like the Gubmit wants us all to rent property owned by some rich person, a corporation, OR the government. Will we get to "choose" in what barracks we can live?





Living in China - Shanghai

Massive
 
Last edited:

m1west

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
It would be interesting to know what exactly the government means by the term "affordable housing"

Should someone who cannot maintain employment be able to "buy" a house on Food stamps and welfare payments?
Or are we talking about "rent?"


Seems like the Gubmit wants us all to rent property owned by some rich person, a corporation, OR the government. Will we get to "choose" in what barracks we can live?





Living in China - Shanghai

Massive
Your on the right track, Like Northernrednecks experience in Canada, its coming here. It is section 8 housing being overseen by HUD. They will force small communities to change the zoning laws. Then when you can only build multi family housing, it will happen pretty fast. They even will go into existing neighborhoods buy up ( emanate domain) homes then tear them down and build section 8 row housing. As Brian stated the crime increases then the property values fall. If your lucky you will have the means to move to an acreage somewhere and escape it for a while. if not you're just screwed.
 

Roofgardener

Active member
Ummm.. building companies will only build these apartment buildings if they can see a profit in them ?
Who exactly would BUY these apartments ? The proverbial 'single mother broken families with problem children' etc couldn't afford to buy, only rent. And who would buy the apartments to rent to such people ?

They might be able to get away with this in the cities, where there is no option BUT to build apartment buildings due to lack of space. But I'm not sure what economic incentive they would have to build such structures in 'the suburbs' ?
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
Ummm.. building companies will only build these apartment buildings if they can see a profit in them ?
Who exactly would BUY these apartments ? The proverbial 'single mother broken families with problem children' etc couldn't afford to buy, only rent. And who would buy the apartments to rent to such people ?

They might be able to get away with this in the cities, where there is no option BUT to build apartment buildings due to lack of space. But I'm not sure what economic incentive they would have to build such structures in 'the suburbs' ?
I think you may have really missed the point here.

You are viewing from the perspective of private enterprise. Private enterprise is founded on the principle of private wealth, IE private ownership of "Property." THAT is what the liberal socialist want destroyed.

And this Green initiative is how that can be done.

Open your mind a bit and understand that we must always fear that our government seeks power and will expand regulations to do it.
A citizenry that does not fear it's governments expansion of power will live, and die, to regret it.

"Society, in every state, is a blessing. But government even in it's best state, is but a necessary evil. In it's worst state an intolerable one."

Thomas Paine.

"A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labour the bread it has earned.
This is the sum of good government"


Thomas Jefferson
 

m1west

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
Ummm.. building companies will only build these apartment buildings if they can see a profit in them ?
Who exactly would BUY these apartments ? The proverbial 'single mother broken families with problem children' etc couldn't afford to buy, only rent. And who would buy the apartments to rent to such people ?

They might be able to get away with this in the cities, where there is no option BUT to build apartment buildings due to lack of space. But I'm not sure what economic incentive they would have to build such structures in 'the suburbs' ?
Franc, explained it pretty well, but to boil it to a base ( no one is buying anything, its tax payer funded government housing. Put in the middle of your middle class neighborhood wether you like it or not. Then raise your taxes to pay for it while your property value diminishes at the same time) I hope this clears it up.
 

Roofgardener

Active member
I think you may have really missed the point here.

You are viewing from the perspective of private enterprise. Private enterprise is founded on the principle of private wealth, IE private ownership of "Property." THAT is what the liberal socialist want destroyed.

And this Green initiative is how that can be done.

Open your mind a bit and understand that we must always fear that our government seeks power and will expand regulations to do it.
A citizenry that does not fear it's governments expansion of power will live, and die, to regret it.

"Society, in every state, is a blessing. But government even in it's best state, is but a necessary evil. In it's worst state an intolerable one."

Thomas Paine.

"A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labour the bread it has earned.
This is the sum of good government"


Thomas Jefferson
well, yes... but.. I don't think you've demonstrated any mechanism whereby Biden can actually DO this ? You talked about central government withholding federal funds unless the towns change their zoning laws. Well, firstly, I think it would take a change in legislation to selectively withhold funds ? And secondly; changing the zoning laws doesn't necessarily mean that building companies would be willing to build the houses, bearing in mind that they know they might not be able to sell them ?
 

m1west

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
well, yes... but.. I don't think you've demonstrated any mechanism whereby Biden can actually DO this ? You talked about central government withholding federal funds unless the towns change their zoning laws. Well, firstly, I think it would take a change in legislation to selectively withhold funds ? And secondly; changing the zoning laws doesn't necessarily mean that building companies would be willing to build the houses, bearing in mind that they know they might not be able to sell them ?
Apparently you don't read all of the posts, read post #24, if you don't understand after that I give up.
 

m1west

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
According to the opening post article, this was about imposing new rules on ZONING. It wasn't about government funded housing ?
I opened the post so shouldn't I know what its about? Changing the zoning is how they get the government housing in existing neighborhoods and keep new single family homes from being built. If you don't understand that you are playing stupid to irritate people. That would make you a troll. I have read some of your other posts on other subjects that suggest the same. My BS meter is pegged.
 

Roofgardener

Active member
Unplug your BS meter. We have different systems in the UK.

So explain it to me; if you force a town to change it's zoning laws to incorporate more "government" housing, does that mean that the government will just build them, purely because of your zoning zones ?

Sort of.. " if you zone it, they will come" ?
 
Top