Today, just 100 Families own 42-million acres or 65,000 square miles of land in the USA

Joined
Mar 11, 2017
Messages
757

PMcGee

WKR
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
700
So you think wealthy people should be limited on how much property they own?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

5MilesBack

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
16,346
Location
Colorado Springs
What is really interesting to me is how these people increased their land holdings by 50% during the great recession (since 2007).

That's not interesting, that's just how you get great deals on property. Today is not the time to buy, you buy when things have crashed and no one else is buying. That's what they did.......smart investors. Bravo.
 

KHNC

WKR
Joined
Jul 11, 2013
Messages
3,661
Location
NC
Well, i have just over 6 acres with several resident squirrels and rabbits. occasionally, a bear will wander across it. For some reason, i never have an issue with poachers. lol
 
K

Kootenay Hunter

Guest
f998a36e3d505039d7ebae09c9b9d86fb92601a126a72d725553072513f3b59d.jpg
 
OP
M
Joined
Mar 11, 2017
Messages
757
That's capitalism. Look at the alternative. Dig into what's going on in South Africa and how well that's working out.

I think it’s interesting that these 100 families increased their land holdings by 50% during the recession.

The administration in charge during the recession bashed capitalism and was supposedly “for the middle class”. Under their watch, the super wealthy got richer and the middle class and small family land/farm owner got poorer.

The administration in charge at the onset of the recession, well you see plenty of their members vacationing and hunting as guests on these large holdings.

If you look at the names on the list of families that benefited from the recession, you will see that a lot of them have direct ties to the very businesses and politicians who caused the recession.
 
OP
M
Joined
Mar 11, 2017
Messages
757
That's only about 2% of the lower 48 acreage.

These 100 families own more land than the total size of the states of New Jersey, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Delaware, Vermont, Rhode Island, Hawaii, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire combined.

The federal government owns about 640 million acres of land in the United States, about 28% of the total land area of 2.27 billion acres.
 

PMcGee

WKR
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
700
I think it’s interesting that these 100 families increased their land holdings by 50% during the recession.

The administration in charge during the recession bashed capitalism and was supposedly “for the middle class”. Under their watch, the super wealthy got richer and the middle class and small family land/farm owner got poorer.

The administration in charge at the onset of the recession, well you see plenty of their members vacationing and hunting as guests on these large holdings.

If you look at the names on the list of families that benefited from the recession, you will see that a lot of them have direct ties to the very businesses and politicians who caused the recession.

So they caused the recession so their friends could benefit.
Many people from both sides of the political spectrum made smart investments during the recession.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Last edited:

ODB

WKR
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
4,085
Location
N.F.D.
Today, just 100 families own about 42 million acres across the country, or 65,000-square-miles.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/22/us/wilks-brothers-fracking-business.html

https://www.landreport.com/americas-100-largest-landowners/

What is really interesting to me is how these people increased their land holdings by 50% during the great recession (since 2007). The greatest transfer of wealth ever. I won’t say too much more because I don’t want to get political.


Transfer of wealth?? Whose wealth did they “take?” The people who stopped paying their mortgages? Help me out here...
 
OP
M
Joined
Mar 11, 2017
Messages
757
It’s funny in the other thread about corner crossing, all the rokslide “socialists” advocating the right to cross a corner. Here in this thread, roksliders take no issue with political corruption/influence enabling the uber wealthy to acquire more land, thus restricting more access.

I just find the double standard interesting.
 
Last edited:

PMcGee

WKR
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
700
It’s funny in the other thread about corner crossing, all the rokslide “socialists” advocating the right to cross a corner. Here in this thread, roksliders take no issue with political corruption/influence enabling the uber wealthy to acquire more land, thus restricting more access.

I just find the double standard interesting.

Do you have any examples of this? Seems like you just don’t like wealthy people having land. If you can show me they bought land that was public before they purchased it then I’ll agree with you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
OP
M
Joined
Mar 11, 2017
Messages
757
Do you have any examples of this? Seems like you just don’t like wealthy people having land. If you can show me they bought land that was public before they purchased it then I’ll agree with you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I don’t think any of the land was formerly public. When was the last public land transfer to private? I know Utah wants the BLM land in that state converted, but I’m not aware of any that ‘has’ been converted.

These big land owning families are buying up small family ranches. Sometimes they buy hundreds at a time. When “hundreds” of small pieces of property that were previously owned by just as many individuals, access for hunting was easier. Those individuals all allowed family and friends to access their property. Now, all those people who previously had access are excluded.

The days of being able to knock on a door and ask permission to hunt or cross some acreage are coming to an end.

As and anecdotal example, my grandfather had permission from a rancher to hunt BLM and Forest land by access through a small family ranch here in SoCal. The rancher was friendly and allowed a bunch of people access through his canyon dirt road. That 300 acre ranch is now owned by a big trust and nobody is allowed access. There are no trailheads, roads or reasonable ways around the canyon access through the old ranch. I hunted there as a kid and saw dozens of other hunters there over the years, no more...
 
Last edited:
Top