Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

staradvertiser.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 195 posts

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#131

Post by twelvechairs »

xyzzy4 wrote: post #81
twelvechairs wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To take the discussion a little wider - land is a finite and productive resource unlike almost all other property. History is full of land reappropriation when it falls into ineffiecent use - whether as goverened as such or through violence when governments fail to do so. As a simple premise governments shouldnt allow land to remain significantly underutilised

Well that depends if your ideal society is one that optimizes for rights or one that optimizes for good land use.

Yes in a way. My point is really that land ownership should not be seen as a fundamental 'right' in the same way as other more fundamental 'rights'. Its actually treated this way in most international instruments (not as a right or given serious caveats) although in common conception many in the west assume otherwise.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#133

Post by trhway »

abtinf wrote: post #50

It is clear that almost no one commenting here has actually read past the first few paragraphs of the article (if that). It is very well written and explain that this is an extremely complex issue. Property rights are the foundation of civil society. Due to variety of factors, Hawaii has destroyed property rights on some parcels due to degenerate laws and legal customs. Just consider one point raised by the article:…

>Property rights are the foundation of civil society.

are you sure that indigenous people want your version of civil society?

>when everyone owns something, no one owns it.

yes. And isn't it how many tribes own their land?

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#134

Post by 0bfus »

jeswin wrote: post #124
abtinf wrote: post #50

It is clear that almost no one commenting here has actually read past the first few paragraphs of the article (if that). It is very well written and explain that this is an extremely complex issue. Property rights are the foundation of civil society. Due to variety of factors, Hawaii has destroyed property rights on some parcels due to degenerate laws and legal customs. Just consider one point raised by the article:…

I am surprised by the number of people who claim this is rich bashing. Indigenous people around the world have lived for centuries with widely different concepts of property ownership. In many cultures, once you reach a working age you build your house where land is available and do your bit (say farming, or crafts) towards a functioning society. There is no land ownership record, but rather it's based on trust. Once…

I agree with you that the social structures we've set up have largely forced the hands of the indigenous people who want to keep their lands in their families in perpetuity to sell. How can we actually make sure these lands stay within families forever possible though? To do something like disallowing the sale of these lands outside of their communities doesn't seem particularly ethical either. In this case, that could mean that some of the landowners who might be hard pressed for money might have a pressing need to sell, so how could we forbid that? Just like preserving our diverse cultures, I totally understand the value proposition, but how can you ethically force cultural preservation? Not a perfect analog, but I'm curious how you think a more equitable system might work here.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#135

Post by trhway »

rweba wrote: post #130

This article makes me respect Bill Gates more. You never hear of him being involved in cringy stuff like this. Yes, it may be legal, but it definitely doesn't look good. Also, is it just me or is Zuck becoming rather paranoid about his privacy and security? (1) He apparently has SIXTEEN bodyguards at his house: http://pagesix.com/2016/02/14/mark-zuckerberg-has-16-bodygua... (2) He bought all the houses surrounding hi…

don't forget that one.

http://fortune.com/2011/05/26/mark-zuckerbergs-new-challenge...

""The only meat I'm eating is from animals I've killed myself," says the Facebook founder and CEO."

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#136

Post by meanduck »

sulam wrote: post #127
meanduck wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You missed the point. The 1% is not about wealth its about power over 99%. Even your random low level bureaucrat has more power than the 5% (wealth-wise).

The cop who pulls me over on the highway has more power over me than my mayor does, or even my governor. Looking at the policies Trump talks about that I can actually analyze ("Make America Great Again" doesn't count), none of them will affect me to the tune of more than $1K / year at best/worst. I am, of course, ignoring the prospect of truly insane shit like starting a nuclear war with Russia. That would affect me…

And thats for a country in Top 10 Ease of doing business [1]. In others politicians/bureaucrats are truly someone to be afraid of. Case in point: The Current Income Tax Raid Raj in India [2].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ease_of_doing_business_index

[2] https://qz.com/860230/here-a-raid-there-a-raid-everywhere-a-...

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#137

Post by throwaway7986 »

kodfodrasz wrote: post #114
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a perfectly rational thing for Zuckerberg to do. It is also absolutely a case of an ultra elite (basically a "king" of today) white man is availing himself of state (ultimately, military) support to force native Hawaiian people off their lands. You made an error in your comment. You said their shares were useless. Clearly, they have a use to the individuals in question - both the natives and Zuckerberg.

This is far mode complicated than the privilieged white man narrateive you used here. I don't like this topic, but when someone talks about this I'd like to know their opinion on this: - what is his/her ethnicity - what ethnicity does he/she think jews have. Why I raise these questions? Becase if someone talks about this topic this is pretty sensite, and also pretty context sensitive. Do "privilieged white" people co…

I'm glad you've brought this topic up, I've been meaning to ask about it on HN before. I'm not American, nor white, and I have trouble understanding the nuances of American race/religious/ethnic relations.

It seems from my perspective that when some negative or unpopular action is taken by a person of Jewish heritage, many times that is spoken of not as a Jewish problem but as a white people problem. Case in point, Mr Zuckerberg is clearly Jewish, but the GP comment didn't say "ultra elite (basically a "king" of today) Jewish man", they said "ultra elite (basically a "king" of today) white man. Why is this?

As another example, I've been hearing more and more how Hollywood has a lack of diversity and this is sometimes phrased as a white people problem in part because so many studio executives are white/Jewish. Now I agree that I would like to see more diversity in Hollywood, and in particular less stereotyping, but it seems to me that Jewish people are vastly overrepresented within the film industry. Yet I never hear the mainstream media say there are too many Jewish people in Hollywood, but I do hear that there are too many white people.

This all gets very confusing to someone trying to understanding American society.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#138

Post by spangry »

nitemice wrote: post #123
cooper12 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have some quotes that might provide insight: > Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires. - purportedly by John Steinbeck > It is a crime for an American to be poor, even though America is a nation of poor. Every other nation has folk traditions of men who were poor but extremely wise and virtuous, and therefore…

I feel a lot of these quotes are true of, not just America, but many of its allies, such as here in Australia. Aussies don't want to see themselves as poor, or in the lower socio-economic group. They all have aspirations of grandeur, and act as if pay day is just a great idea away. This is epitomised by the concept of the "little aussie battler" and the "Great Australian Dream".

Indeed. Although I think one big difference is that Australians are occasionally forced to face reality en masse, the last time being around the late-80s early-90s. I think we're due for another dose of reality, now that the mining boom is over and we can no longer sustain our current economic model (which is indistinguishable from a ponzi scheme).

As Donald Horne wrote in his book, The Lucky Country: "Australia is a lucky country run mainly by second rate people who share its luck. It lives on other people's ideas, and, although its ordinary people are adaptable, most of its leaders (in all fields) so lack curiosity about the events that surround them that they are often taken by surprise."[0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lucky_Country

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#139

Post by throwaway7986 »

kodfodrasz wrote: post #114
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a perfectly rational thing for Zuckerberg to do. It is also absolutely a case of an ultra elite (basically a "king" of today) white man is availing himself of state (ultimately, military) support to force native Hawaiian people off their lands. You made an error in your comment. You said their shares were useless. Clearly, they have a use to the individuals in question - both the natives and Zuckerberg.

This is far mode complicated than the privilieged white man narrateive you used here. I don't like this topic, but when someone talks about this I'd like to know their opinion on this: - what is his/her ethnicity - what ethnicity does he/she think jews have. Why I raise these questions? Becase if someone talks about this topic this is pretty sensite, and also pretty context sensitive. Do "privilieged white" people co…

I'm curious why my comment was marked as dead with 1-2 minutes of posting it. I don't believe I have said anything inflammatory, have I?

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#140

Post by 3131s »

refurb wrote: post #73
3131s wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (many people own the land he thought he bought) and he wants some privacy. Then tough luck for him. He should have figured that out before he blew 100 million dollars on it. This "weird land practice" is likely meant to protect native Hawaiian people from being forced out of their homeland which, if this article is accurate, is what Zuckerberg intends to do. EDIT: I did go looking and a few others are reporting on…

This "weird land practice" is likely meant to protect native Hawaiian people from being forced out of their homeland That seems like wild speculation on your part. Any evidence to back up your claim?

From the article I posted:

"Under the Kuleana Act of 1850, those lands are also passed down to people who now only own fractions of an interest in the property."

And from Wikpedia:

"Another notable part of the Great Mahele was the Kuleana Act of 1850."

"The Great Māhele was one of the most important episodes of Hawaiian history, second only to the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom. While intended to provide secure title to Hawaiians, it would eventually end up separating many of them from their land."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_M%C4%81hele

So that was the intention, but if you read further into the Wikipedia article it explains how many poorer Hawaiians did not understand the new laws and therefore lost their land to rich Hawaiians and the nobility.

Post reply on HN