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

American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

earthhope.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 199 posts

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#121

Post by pixelpoet »

skylurk wrote: post #109
pixelpoet wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm likewise aware that using literally to mean figuratively isn't particularly new, but the phrase's existence or age isn't the issue.

I respect your commitment to influence the evolution of the language :)

Heh, I just write too much too readily about unimportant opinions, and a lot of people read sentences longer than a few words as incontrovertible proof of being triggered :D

Also it's difficult not to call out the hypocrisy of descriptivists simultaneously saying that basically anything goes, but my preferred use of language in particular is wrong and I need to listen to what they prescribe :P

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#122

Post by bix6 »

silversmith wrote: post #112
bix6 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I go back and forth on this. I love the idea of preserving land but this also seems to be a way for the wealthy to insulate their home eg buy 10 acres next to your house and declare it undeveloped. Now you get an amazing property in a pristine zone that nobody can touch all while getting a tax break you don’t need and boxing out the next generation.

All the while foxes, deer and birds can still develop their dwellings there. Blatant disregard of the law, I say.

Yeah come on it only takes a year and a little donation to get permits! Just stand in line little fox.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#124

Post by bix6 »

soperj wrote: post #108
burkaman wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This segment is not as niche as it used to be and is frequently abused for enormous tax benefits now. There doesn't need to be any real economic or environmental value to the land, you can just pay someone to do a fake survey/appraisal and assign an astronomical value, and then not pay any taxes because you're now forgoing all that fake value with your conservation easement. > One example: the former Millstone Golf C…

Wouldn't that just be straight up fraud? They just bought the land for $5.4 million, that was clearly the actual value.

O you think the IRS exists to prosecute rich people for creating money out of thin air? No they are focused on withholding from the underpaid “unskilled” workers who messed up their taxes thanks to TCJA.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#125

Post by pixelpoet »

shayway wrote: post #95
pixelpoet wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My objection is in direct analogy to "could care less": it fails to rule out the very thing that is to be ruled out. The grains of sand example should make it clear: it is not true that this grain is one of few at the beach, but it is true that it's one of the only. This makes it a poor expression for scarcity, and while obviously we know what was actually intended (as with "could care less"), that doesn't really mak…

I'm trying to understand but struggling -- so it is specifically the phrase "one of the only" that bothers you, but the example of "only five minutes late" is acceptable? And the issue is that "only" in that context doesn't mean a singular item, but rather a group of ambiguous size?

It doesn't really bother me, I just think it's not fit for purpose the exact same way as could care less to communicate not caring.

BTW thanks for the hot tip regarding the posting delay feature! Lord knows I need it, nothing induces https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%27esprit_de_l%27escalier like hitting that reply button :"D

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#126

Post by qball »

DennisP wrote: post #117
bix6 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I go back and forth on this. I love the idea of preserving land but this also seems to be a way for the wealthy to insulate their home eg buy 10 acres next to your house and declare it undeveloped. Now you get an amazing property in a pristine zone that nobody can touch all while getting a tax break you don’t need and boxing out the next generation.

"Boxing out the next generation" is exactly what the law is for. I guess we have to decide whether we want more natural wilderness or more luxury homes with nice views. The only way I can think of to preserve the wilderness without any isolated homes for the wealthy is for the government to buy up the land. I'd probably support that, if we could get it done, but it does mean that if the money for it comes out of the…

Boxing out the next generation with environmentalism as the excuse.

This is also a massive problem in BC; the ALR exists to do exactly this. There's lots of land available, it's just illegal to build anything other than a farm on it, and the real estate market is as a consequence as usurious as you'd expect it to be.

Of course, none of this is new. Enclosure predates the Romans.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#127

Post by rstat1 »

pimlottc wrote: post #66

Seems like a good thing but I was definitely a bit wary from the title. I was worried it would be a MAGA-aligned organization pushing to “unlock” public lands for commercial exploitation (e.g. drilling).

Had the same thought. Was glad to see I was wrong.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#128

Post by yencabulator »

ericmay wrote: post #58
wood_spirit wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crikey, I”d hardly sell the UK as good with land access! The UK is pretty awful in comparison to the nearby Nordics. Sweden, for example, has a right to roam in nature which makes the constant antagonism between footpath walkers and landowners that are a mainstay of the English countryside seem so petty.

I'll tell you what, the Nordics themselves are pretty awful when compared with the Outback or American southwest. You can just roam wherever you want, no questions asked!

Nordics let you roam on private property.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#129

Post by BeetleB »

burkaman wrote: post #102
BeetleB wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the early 80's, Congress passed some laws that allow people to buy undeveloped land, and declare it to be undeveloped for perpetuity (no one can develop on it even if sold). The owner gets some tax benefits from doing so. It became a niche segment in the real estate. The idea is you find land that is cheap, but you have a feeling it has mineral wealth. You buy it cheap, get the survey done, and show that it was re…

This segment is not as niche as it used to be and is frequently abused for enormous tax benefits now. There doesn't need to be any real economic or environmental value to the land, you can just pay someone to do a fake survey/appraisal and assign an astronomical value, and then not pay any taxes because you're now forgoing all that fake value with your conservation easement. > One example: the former Millstone Golf C…

Well, this may explain why the presenter said it is one of the most litigious parts of Real Estate :-)

Yes, I do know about the potential for fraud. Ultimately, this sounds more like a problem with the government not doing their due diligence as opposed to a problem with the idea itself.

And yes, this is fundamentally something only rich people can make use of. The average Joe doesn't have over $100K sitting around to buy a piece of land only to intentionally lower its value!

The example of the golf course they give is weird. You're not allowed to do it to a property that has a structure on it (at least not one with utility connections). Nor can it have paved roads. What kind of golf course was this?

Still, thanks for the article. It provides a more down to earth context.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#130

Post by potato3732842 »

bix6 wrote: post #122
silversmith wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the while foxes, deer and birds can still develop their dwellings there. Blatant disregard of the law, I say.

Yeah come on it only takes a year and a little donation to get permits! Just stand in line little fox.

Try $50k and 1-3yr. More if you're doing something other than residential. You can thank the EPA for that. Can't do get approval without a plan for the stormwater. Can't do that without engineers. Engineers won't draw and stamp without surveys and the like.

Mega-corps building cookie cutter subdivisions or commercial space obviously pay less because they're vertically integrated and highly streamlined.

Some small scale 1-4 unit stuff (single structure here and there) is exempted, unless it's too close to water of course.

Post reply on HN