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

151–160 of 195 posts

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#151

Post by pyrale »

0bfus wrote: post #134
jeswin wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 cou…

Just accept that the property which you buy is provided with agreements granted to neighbours, and that by buying the property, you inherit the duty to said neighbours.

And then, don't fill a lawsuit to put people out of their homes in order to void these duties.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#152

Post by jhonovich »

Hawaii has defeated many powerful forces. Recall the Superferry disaster / ouster.

Whether or not Zuckerburg is right or wrong, locals have significant power to disrupt the actions of rich and powerful outsiders.

Too much of the comments here are analyzing the legal issues and the not the political / social forces involved in a haole vs local conflict.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#153

Post by cromulent »

AustinBGibbons wrote: post #32

Zuckerberg purchased the land from all serious parties, and now his lawyers are doing their due diligence to track down anyone who might own even a "1/3,276" share, and are hardly treating anyone unfairly. Put down your pitchforks, no one is being driven off their land.

Indeed. Another article quotes his lawyer as saying "Zuckerberg has no intention of contesting any co-owner who can prove their interest in any of the land parcels."[0]

For some of us though, the historical context of the US invasion and overthrow of Hawaii means that this sounds quite distasteful, although reasonable.

[0] http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/34289685/facebook-ceo-sui...

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#154

Post by hueving »

debt wrote: post #98
hueving wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would anyone read the article when they can take the opportunity to bash the rich?

because the top 8 billionaires own more wealth than the bottom 50% of the global population? the rich have really been sucking it up lately. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/20...

Yet killing these 8 billionaires and taking their wealth would do almost nothing when spread across the bottom 50% you are comparing them to.

You don't raise civilization by chopping off the top.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#155

Post by matt4077 »

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.

It's one a set of rights generally considered essential, i. e. "human rights". But among those it doesn't seem to be considered very special. The UN charter of human rights (written in no small part by the US) finds 16 other rights to list before it gets around to property: http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights.

But anyway, I fail to see how even utmost reverence for the centrality of property would change anything about this:

> one small parcel has over 300 informal owners who are descended from a Portuguese immigrant

People inherit stuff. They leave it to multiple children. Therefore it gets split up. To force any of them to sell against their will is obviously infringing property rights – not that it's not possibly justified, but it seems pretty clearly on the side of a less strict application of "property rights".

And "when everyone owns something, no one owns it" is just wrong-ish, at least in the intended sense of neglect and uselessness. The Statue of Liberty is owned by everyone and no one, as are the airwaves, most of the Rocky Mountains and the works of Shakespeare. All of them seem to be doing fine.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#156

Post by ghostDancer »

curun1r wrote: post #11
haywardsmyfault wrote: post #2

You could argue some of the land parcels in question are owned by growing numbers of family members with each new generation, and that therefore it's likely some (even most) owners wouldn't utilize the land. However, it's also interesting to digest this situation alongside Oxfam's report [1] on 62 people accumulating more wealth than half the world's population combined. Zuckerberg owns 700 acres of Kauai[2]. Why isn…

> Why isn't that enough? According to the article, the owners of the parcels have the right to traverse the land he already bought. From the sound of the article, this is making a mountain out of a molehill. He wants his privacy and, thanks to bizarre land ownership practices in Hawaii, these parcels are fractionally owned by hundreds of individuals making it impossible to make a traditional offer. This legal process…

That kind of law exists in other places too, if your property cuts access to other people's property they have the right to cross it. It's not only in Hawaii, i've seen it in many other places , in Spain in rural areas is quite common.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#157

Post by matt4077 »

0bfus wrote: post #134
jeswin wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 cou…

Isn't that the exact problems that Indian reservations were set up to solve? A kind of community-administered perpetual land grant, basically.

It seems that – some problems within the tribal administrations non-withstanding – the external legal relationships are solved pretty well within that framework.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#158

Post by matt4077 »

Inconel wrote: post #147
jeswin wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>Even if you get legal rights from each one of the current owners, it still deprives the unborn children of their rights. Would you mind expanding on this a bit, I'm having trouble understanding what you mean? Does this only hold true for land or other types of private property as well? With regards to land ownership, was it really solely based on trust, or servitude and force? I'm no expert on traditional Hawaiian l…

> Would you mind expanding on this a bit, I'm having trouble understanding what you mean? Does this only hold true for land or other types of private property as well?

Not op, but I believe the idea here is that use of the land has a cultural dimension, and not just the usual economic dimension. The concept seems quite foreign to me (and probably most) but that may be because nature has a much lower significance in christian mythology compared to others. Maybe as an analog: if Trump were to suggest selling the declaration of independence to the highest bidder (or everything in the Smithsonian, or Yellowstone etc.), could you imagine people invoking their not-yet-born grandchildren, and their right to see these things?

Regarding your other points, I know there were many communities with a structure much closer to egalitarianism than we can imagine among the pacific islands, and even where "chiefs" existed, their position was probably something completely different than what we're bound to imagine upon hearing the term. But I have no specific knowledge of Hawaii.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#159

Post by disordinary »

lefstathiou wrote: post #64
disordinary wrote: post #15

Surely his lawyers informed him of the situation when he bought it. In Hawaii (or the US in general) can people own beaches below the high tide mark? Surely it's impossible to have 100% seclusion anyway as people can land by boat when the tide is low and enjoy at their leisure?

I actually saw his property when my GF and I were in Kauai a few months ago and visited the beach in front of his lot for fun. So his property is adjacent to a land reserve so it is much more secluded than just the land he owns. He is building a massive wall in front of the house that is obstructing some of the views of people on the other side of the street which they are not happy about (you can google to see it) a…

Thanks for the info. :)

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#160

Post by matt4077 »

_m8fo wrote: post #47

Is there a historical precedent for those above the peasants, but still below the king, to constantly rationalize and serve as king apologists? I notice an interesting trend with a large chunk of the discussion being centered towards why [rich person's] [behavior] is not [as bad] as you think. Maybe it's because the king enables those above the peasants to retain that position? It's really interesting, actually. Kind…

I'm not too fond of psychologising. But if anything, I believe a fondness for "contrarianism" is more likely to be at work.
Post reply on HN