Very cool Alex! Maybe we need to introduce your tent city to the guys featured in this film! - http://thesparkfilm.com/
The Libertarian Solution To End Homelessness
- Thread starter Alex Libman
- Start date
Alex Libman
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Messages
- 1,423
Thank you very much for words of support. Sorry I skipped a couple of things - I'll catch up with replies later.
Quick Tent City of Lakewood, NJ news round-up:
Quick Tent City of Lakewood, NJ news round-up:
- The Aug 7th "world premiere" of Destiny's Bridge, a feature documentary film about Tent City, is SOLD OUT! A successful launch likely means there will be more screenings in other locations nationwide, film festivals, etc. Be sure to like / follow the film on Facebook or Twitter for updates. It should also be possible for people to sponsor or host screenings in their area - PM me if you're interested, and I'll talk to the filmmaker.
- There's been a lull in the confrontation with the government - for now. Minister Steve Brigham wanted to appear cooperative, stay away from Town Hall, let them tear up a few tents, and hope they forget about Tent City for a while - particularly that they don't interfere with the film premiere. (Which we couldn't hold at the Strand Theater in Lakewood - mainly because they're part of the same good-ol-boy network as the municipal gov't.) I've decided to follow his lead. It looks like it worked, at least for a while... For their part, after they've had their latest "show of force" with the bulldozers, the piggies got lazy again and there's been less harassment than usual...
- "Less harassment than usual" is still A LOT of harassment to deal with. A few days ago cops came in and fired 5 bullets at one of our dogs... In another recent example, they've blocked off the road to prevent a church youth group from entering with donations. Times are hard, and donations to Tent City are drying up, mostly because a lot of people have been misinformed by the unfriendly local media that the place is already shut down...
- There's a lot of incompetence and confusion about that "free apartment for a year to GTFO" bribe that everyone except me accepted. Only a couple of people have been placed so far... So the population of the camp is the highest it's ever been, with a lot of people jumping on board just before the deadline to get free housing. (Some people are what we call the "Bad Apples", and they could be deliberate monkey-wrenches thrown at us by the municipal gov't - they make up ridiculous slander against Minister Steve, and try to scare away any donors that come in. Remember that we're not allowed by the gov't to evict anyone...) A lot of people thought the government would follow through quickly and keep its word - LOL...
- I've been trying to help Tent City grow its online presence, but, to be perfectly honest... I'm just a burned-out half-blind manic-depressive ex-programmer living off-the-grid... Promoting the documentary has taken up most of my productive energy. (I've also been frustrated by the fact that I can't get anyone else here to help me do some serious internal journalism and writing for the Web-site; and not everybody at Tent City is happy with my libertarian positions...) I could really use everyone's help in spreading the word about Tent City. Please invite all your friends to the TentCityNJ page on Facebook. If you run a blog, please give Tent City a mention to help spread the word...
- Last night Drudge Report had a picture of Chris Christie (Vote Ken Kaplan! F/T) and a link to a news story about a tent city in NJ! BUT, in what to me is a huge snub, it had to be a story about the relatively tiny and disorganized tent city in Camden, not our Tent City in Lakewood... WTF?!
Last edited:
Alex Libman
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Messages
- 1,423
Dutch TV show about Tent City - 30 minutes: [FB] [G+] [TW]
A reality show from the Netherlands called Destination Unknown, season 3, episode 3. Dutch and English dialog, with English subtitles where needed. The episode aired in Europe on March 29, 2012.
The show meets up with random young people in the Netherlands, and offers to take them on a free trip, but there's a catch - they won't know their actual destination. In this episode, the young people are excited to learn that they're going to the USA - they're thinking Vegas, Disneyland, NYC... But they end up somewhere completely unexpected!
Tent City is a village of about 100 otherwise-homeless individuals living in the woods of Lakewood, NJ - about an hour drive from New York City. These are people who, for various reasons, were unable to pay the rent (which in the area starts at $1100/month for a one-bedroom apartment), had no other place where they could stay, and had no choice but to live in a shanty or a tent on "public" land.
A reality show from the Netherlands called Destination Unknown, season 3, episode 3. Dutch and English dialog, with English subtitles where needed. The episode aired in Europe on March 29, 2012.
The show meets up with random young people in the Netherlands, and offers to take them on a free trip, but there's a catch - they won't know their actual destination. In this episode, the young people are excited to learn that they're going to the USA - they're thinking Vegas, Disneyland, NYC... But they end up somewhere completely unexpected!
Tent City is a village of about 100 otherwise-homeless individuals living in the woods of Lakewood, NJ - about an hour drive from New York City. These are people who, for various reasons, were unable to pay the rent (which in the area starts at $1100/month for a one-bedroom apartment), had no other place where they could stay, and had no choice but to live in a shanty or a tent on "public" land.
Last edited:
Alex Libman
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Messages
- 1,423
I apologize for the delay in my response.
First of all, "unemployed" is a somewhat inaccurate term to apply to all Tent City residents.
What most Tent City residents have in common (excluding 1-2 political activism nuts we have here, hehe) is that they cannot afford better housing. And the term "afford" doesn't merely mean having enough savings / income to get an apartment for a few of months, and then likely fail to make rent and get evicted again, ending up penniless and worse off than before. It's not worth-while to commit to an apartment unless you have some security about being able to afford it on a long-term basis, and have enough money left over for other things as well. As the result of countless regulations, zoning laws and other contributing factors to artificial scarcity, property tax, etc, a one-bedroom apartment is pretty much impossible to afford for one person working full-time at near-minimum wage.
Almost all Tent City residents I know -- even the drunks and the addicts -- look for work at least some of the time. They go to employment agencies, and they stand in certain places where employers pick them up for a day's construction work. People tend to go through cycles of discouragement - at the peak of this cycle they make their best effort to get their lives together and find work, but then they get disappointed and surrender to their addictions for a while...
Some residents are in their 60s and 70s. A few are physically or mentally disabled. Some are living off disability or veteran's benefits (a disproportionately large fraction of TC residents are vets), which isn't enough to afford an apartment. Some work full time, but haven't yet been able to leave Tent City. Some have a large fraction of their salary deducted because they're behind on Child Support payments... One very resourceful Tent City resident makes a respectable amount of money collecting scrap metal. At some point we had an artist who would intermittently get lots of money by selling an artwork, but then have no income for months. So they cannot afford an apartment, but they could be off welfare, pulling their weight, and have a fairly decent quality of life in a place like Tent City.
Tent City does have a significant turn-around rate - people come here when they're down on their luck, and leave when they've had full-time work for a while and were able to afford better options. I don't have the exact numbers, but I'd say that of the hundreds of people who've come through Tent City, only a (highly visible) minority stayed more than 1-2 years.
As I state above, government is the cause of many problems that Tent City residents are having: it in effect discouraged job creation in the area, it multiplies the cost of rent, it creates resentment against them by stealing in their name and accomplishing very little positive with that money, it stifles voluntary charity, it makes addiction worse through prohibitionism, etc.
Tent City is the free market answer to the problem - it routes around government BS and provides a lower cost of living, which is what the marketplace demands.
My ideal would be to see Tent Cities where everyone can pull their own weight working at least part-time, but currently this isn't the case. I do support legalizing prostitution, but I think everyone will have better options for employment. We need voluntary organizations that make it easier for poor people to find at least part-time work. Poor people can also pull some of their economic weight by building their own shelter, building and tending greenhouses that grow food, etc.
At present, our Tent City relies heavily on a network of local volunteers who donate food, bottled water, and other survival essentials. For example, one champion supporter (Jeff "the Chef" Doucette) cooks a weekly meal for the entire camp. He also alleviated our drinking water shortage with the aid of two 120-gallon tanks - one kept at the camp to dispense water, and another in his truck to bring refills for the first. We also accept financial donations (ex. via PayPal and BitCoin), which go to things like trash bags, propane (with which we heat food and water), and gasoline for the electrical generator (which powers the groundwater pump for the shower, and the car batteries which now recharge my laptop, which has also been donated).
Voluntary charity is not only far more moral than the Welfare State, but it is also far more efficient, and it averts the danger of centralized power inevitably being misused to tyrannical ends.
Some people help the poor for religious or altruistic reasons, but there are also rational and selfish reasons to do so. Homelessness and extreme poverty are problems that the free market needs to solve in order to flourish, and people who help solve these problems should get all the recognition and respect they deserve. I'll comply with any donor's request to remain anonymous, but I encourage them not to. We need to build a culture where voluntary philanthropy is valued, and where building a Tent City gets you more respect than driving a Lamborghini - then that will be the death of the Welfare State, and all other Statism along with it!
Cost-effective solutions to poverty often call for ingenious technological solutions. Like Howard Roark agreeing to architect a housing project for the poor in exchange for nothing but an agreement to retain creative control, because the economic design challenge fascinated him, many competent individuals will find perfectly selfish motivations to voluntarily help the poor. Rational people will help eliminate poverty - not because they see themselves as "their brothers' keepers", but because they love innovation, efficiency, and freedom!
You're way off on some imaginary tangent. No one is advocating a hunter-gatherer lifestyle (with the possible exception of one particularly nutty he-man "troll" I've met on the FSP forum, whose nonsense was debunked to pieces).
If we really needed to produce our own food, it would be more efficient to grow potatoes, beans, corn, kale, mushrooms, hemp, etc. But that's not really necessary in the modern world. We never have any real shortage of food at Tent City - donated canned beans, perfectly fresh bagels, and yesterday's surplus pizza (donated daily) are the worst case scenario. We usually have a BBQ several times a day here. There are about a hundred chickens and some rabbits living in Tent City, but I've only heard of a couple of occasions of people eating them - they are said to reduce the population of ticks.
What the homeless in the USA lack the most isn't food, but land! This obviously isn't because USA is some tiny overpopulated island like Hong Kong, but because so much land is hoarded by the state; the so-called "public land", from which homeless people are being bulldozed! Keep that in mind the next time some socialist tells you that "public" government institutions are necessary to help the poor!
(Gotta run. Will finish replying later.)
First of all, "unemployed" is a somewhat inaccurate term to apply to all Tent City residents.
What most Tent City residents have in common (excluding 1-2 political activism nuts we have here, hehe) is that they cannot afford better housing. And the term "afford" doesn't merely mean having enough savings / income to get an apartment for a few of months, and then likely fail to make rent and get evicted again, ending up penniless and worse off than before. It's not worth-while to commit to an apartment unless you have some security about being able to afford it on a long-term basis, and have enough money left over for other things as well. As the result of countless regulations, zoning laws and other contributing factors to artificial scarcity, property tax, etc, a one-bedroom apartment is pretty much impossible to afford for one person working full-time at near-minimum wage.
Almost all Tent City residents I know -- even the drunks and the addicts -- look for work at least some of the time. They go to employment agencies, and they stand in certain places where employers pick them up for a day's construction work. People tend to go through cycles of discouragement - at the peak of this cycle they make their best effort to get their lives together and find work, but then they get disappointed and surrender to their addictions for a while...
Some residents are in their 60s and 70s. A few are physically or mentally disabled. Some are living off disability or veteran's benefits (a disproportionately large fraction of TC residents are vets), which isn't enough to afford an apartment. Some work full time, but haven't yet been able to leave Tent City. Some have a large fraction of their salary deducted because they're behind on Child Support payments... One very resourceful Tent City resident makes a respectable amount of money collecting scrap metal. At some point we had an artist who would intermittently get lots of money by selling an artwork, but then have no income for months. So they cannot afford an apartment, but they could be off welfare, pulling their weight, and have a fairly decent quality of life in a place like Tent City.
Tent City does have a significant turn-around rate - people come here when they're down on their luck, and leave when they've had full-time work for a while and were able to afford better options. I don't have the exact numbers, but I'd say that of the hundreds of people who've come through Tent City, only a (highly visible) minority stayed more than 1-2 years.
As I state above, government is the cause of many problems that Tent City residents are having: it in effect discouraged job creation in the area, it multiplies the cost of rent, it creates resentment against them by stealing in their name and accomplishing very little positive with that money, it stifles voluntary charity, it makes addiction worse through prohibitionism, etc.
Tent City is the free market answer to the problem - it routes around government BS and provides a lower cost of living, which is what the marketplace demands.
My ideal would be to see Tent Cities where everyone can pull their own weight working at least part-time, but currently this isn't the case. I do support legalizing prostitution, but I think everyone will have better options for employment. We need voluntary organizations that make it easier for poor people to find at least part-time work. Poor people can also pull some of their economic weight by building their own shelter, building and tending greenhouses that grow food, etc.
At present, our Tent City relies heavily on a network of local volunteers who donate food, bottled water, and other survival essentials. For example, one champion supporter (Jeff "the Chef" Doucette) cooks a weekly meal for the entire camp. He also alleviated our drinking water shortage with the aid of two 120-gallon tanks - one kept at the camp to dispense water, and another in his truck to bring refills for the first. We also accept financial donations (ex. via PayPal and BitCoin), which go to things like trash bags, propane (with which we heat food and water), and gasoline for the electrical generator (which powers the groundwater pump for the shower, and the car batteries which now recharge my laptop, which has also been donated).
Voluntary charity is not only far more moral than the Welfare State, but it is also far more efficient, and it averts the danger of centralized power inevitably being misused to tyrannical ends.
Some people help the poor for religious or altruistic reasons, but there are also rational and selfish reasons to do so. Homelessness and extreme poverty are problems that the free market needs to solve in order to flourish, and people who help solve these problems should get all the recognition and respect they deserve. I'll comply with any donor's request to remain anonymous, but I encourage them not to. We need to build a culture where voluntary philanthropy is valued, and where building a Tent City gets you more respect than driving a Lamborghini - then that will be the death of the Welfare State, and all other Statism along with it!
Cost-effective solutions to poverty often call for ingenious technological solutions. Like Howard Roark agreeing to architect a housing project for the poor in exchange for nothing but an agreement to retain creative control, because the economic design challenge fascinated him, many competent individuals will find perfectly selfish motivations to voluntarily help the poor. Rational people will help eliminate poverty - not because they see themselves as "their brothers' keepers", but because they love innovation, efficiency, and freedom!
You're way off on some imaginary tangent. No one is advocating a hunter-gatherer lifestyle (with the possible exception of one particularly nutty he-man "troll" I've met on the FSP forum, whose nonsense was debunked to pieces).
If we really needed to produce our own food, it would be more efficient to grow potatoes, beans, corn, kale, mushrooms, hemp, etc. But that's not really necessary in the modern world. We never have any real shortage of food at Tent City - donated canned beans, perfectly fresh bagels, and yesterday's surplus pizza (donated daily) are the worst case scenario. We usually have a BBQ several times a day here. There are about a hundred chickens and some rabbits living in Tent City, but I've only heard of a couple of occasions of people eating them - they are said to reduce the population of ticks.
What the homeless in the USA lack the most isn't food, but land! This obviously isn't because USA is some tiny overpopulated island like Hong Kong, but because so much land is hoarded by the state; the so-called "public land", from which homeless people are being bulldozed! Keep that in mind the next time some socialist tells you that "public" government institutions are necessary to help the poor!
(Gotta run. Will finish replying later.)
Last edited:
osan
Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2009
- Messages
- 16,866
Who was that masked NJ-ite?
Seriously, I hope you all can pull it off, but it seems to me that the odds are agin' you not because the people are incapable, but because government is going to do its best to torpedo you. The very last thing they want is an independent colony to do its own thing. This is doubly dangerous to Themme if that colony begins to prosper because the rest will see it and want to do the same. This is why the interminable grey blandness must be universal and uniform to a fairly high tolerance. The minute someone steps out of sync and starts achieving more, the rest see it and want the same. That is the beginning of real trouble for the tyrant and he will therefore not likely tolerate it.
Alex Libman
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Messages
- 1,423
A rant on the hypocrisy of "public" land (or "public" anything)...
It has been demonstrated over and over again in economics that market mechanisms encourage efficiency, innovation, and user satisfaction.
You don't like a private Internet cafe, you go to a different one (or pursue some other means of attaining the same benefit). But you have to pay for the "public" library - whether you use it or not, and whether you like it or not. They keep telling us that "public" institutions are necessary to help the poor - not everyone can pay at a private cybercafé. That justification is flawed, but it's still the most coherent and popular justification for public schools, public parks, etc, etc, etc.
"In the name of the poor" the government spends $62,000/year per family below the poverty line (and that's just entitlements, not all "public" institutions). In the name of the poor we have government monopolies in child education, many aspects of transportation, increasingly in health insurance, etc, etc, etc. If just a fraction of that money had been redistributed directly (i.e. Guaranteed Minimum Income), there'd be no poor in this country, no excuse to retain those government monopolies, and market institutions would bring great efficiency and innovation to all those fields.
The land that Tent City is situated on has been withdrawn from the marketplace and made "public". The government didn't homestead this land through labor or obtain it through voluntary trade; it is the default owner through the institutionalized coercion of state.
The "upper" and "middle" income classes didn't need that service from the government - they can support plenty of greenery (directly or indirectly) in their neighborhoods, county clubs, golf courses, private parks, etc. They pay more in taxes than they get back, and what they get back isn't necessarily what they want.
Thus this excuse for "government ownership" of land (which was built on false premises to begin with), breaks down completely when laws are passed prohibiting the poorest people from using it!
It has been demonstrated over and over again in economics that market mechanisms encourage efficiency, innovation, and user satisfaction.
You don't like a private Internet cafe, you go to a different one (or pursue some other means of attaining the same benefit). But you have to pay for the "public" library - whether you use it or not, and whether you like it or not. They keep telling us that "public" institutions are necessary to help the poor - not everyone can pay at a private cybercafé. That justification is flawed, but it's still the most coherent and popular justification for public schools, public parks, etc, etc, etc.
"In the name of the poor" the government spends $62,000/year per family below the poverty line (and that's just entitlements, not all "public" institutions). In the name of the poor we have government monopolies in child education, many aspects of transportation, increasingly in health insurance, etc, etc, etc. If just a fraction of that money had been redistributed directly (i.e. Guaranteed Minimum Income), there'd be no poor in this country, no excuse to retain those government monopolies, and market institutions would bring great efficiency and innovation to all those fields.
The land that Tent City is situated on has been withdrawn from the marketplace and made "public". The government didn't homestead this land through labor or obtain it through voluntary trade; it is the default owner through the institutionalized coercion of state.
The "upper" and "middle" income classes didn't need that service from the government - they can support plenty of greenery (directly or indirectly) in their neighborhoods, county clubs, golf courses, private parks, etc. They pay more in taxes than they get back, and what they get back isn't necessarily what they want.
Thus this excuse for "government ownership" of land (which was built on false premises to begin with), breaks down completely when laws are passed prohibiting the poorest people from using it!
Alex Libman
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Messages
- 1,423
Last night our Tent City [FB] had a visit from a current political celebrity - Barbara Buono [FB] [TW] [WP].
In case anyone didn't know, Barbara Buono is the NJ State Senator who is the Democratic Party nominee for NJ Governor, running against incumbent Chris Christie and NJ Libertarian Party candidate Ken Kaplan [FB] [TW].
A statement from Minister Steve Brigham, who runs Tent City:
News Coverage:
Video:
---
Needless to say, my own participation in this has been minimal, except of course doing my "job" as Tent City's "Webmaster" in posting some stuff to http://TentCityNJ.org/Barbara_Buono or http://FB.com/TentCityNJ.
I've also commented on a bunch of news articles (and the seemingly-infinite syndications of an AP story) - and it seems like that got me in trouble with a local radio station...
In case anyone didn't know, Barbara Buono is the NJ State Senator who is the Democratic Party nominee for NJ Governor, running against incumbent Chris Christie and NJ Libertarian Party candidate Ken Kaplan [FB] [TW].
A statement from Minister Steve Brigham, who runs Tent City:
News Coverage:
- NJ 101.5: Buono To Visit Lakewood's Tent City
- NJ Today: Buono Tours Lakewood Tent City
- WOMB: Buono Takes Sobering Look at Lakewood Tent City
- Lakewood Scoop: Governor-hopeful Sen Barbara Buono Visits Lakewood's Tent City
- Asbury Park Press: Buono says Lakewood's Tent City points to Christie policy problems
- NorthJersey.com: Buono tours homeless encampment as Christie picks up 'Cake Boss' endorsement
- Ocean County Signal: Buono Uses Tent City Visit to Criticize Christie for Giving False Promises to the Homeless
- The Daily Beast: Barbara Buono, the Ultimate Underdog
Video:
---
Needless to say, my own participation in this has been minimal, except of course doing my "job" as Tent City's "Webmaster" in posting some stuff to http://TentCityNJ.org/Barbara_Buono or http://FB.com/TentCityNJ.
I've also commented on a bunch of news articles (and the seemingly-infinite syndications of an AP story) - and it seems like that got me in trouble with a local radio station...
Last edited:
Alex Libman
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Messages
- 1,423
By Rosemary Conte on Patch.com -- Film Destiny's Bridge Showing in Ocean Twp, NJ --
Please invite all your friends in NJ to the Facebook Event!
Most direct link to buy tickets - http://BrownPaperTickets.com/event/450416
For updates on future screening locations, announcements about DVD's, etc please follow Destiny's Bridge on Facebook or Twitter.
---
Video of the premiere - film screening, Q&A, and after-party from Aug 7th: [FB] [G+] [TW]
Please invite all your friends in NJ to the Facebook Event!
Most direct link to buy tickets - http://BrownPaperTickets.com/event/450416
For updates on future screening locations, announcements about DVD's, etc please follow Destiny's Bridge on Facebook or Twitter.
---
Video of the premiere - film screening, Q&A, and after-party from Aug 7th: [FB] [G+] [TW]
Last edited:
Alex Libman
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Messages
- 1,423
My open e-mail to [email protected] about http://wobm.com/lakewood-works-towards-tent-city-closure/ - subject "Very Inaccurate Article About Tent City":
Alex Libman
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Messages
- 1,423
Tent City Bumper Stickers!
Tent City Bumper Stickers - ranging from serious to religious to political to downright silly. What better way is there to promote a cause?
Tweak 'em, print 'em, stick 'em where you want.
Join our TC-BS (Tent City Bumper Stickers) Facebook Group to help brainstorm new ideas or post your design.
If these images get cut off for width, press Ctrl-Minus to zoom out your browser:
We're ordering some bulk-printed right now to hand out to visitors to Tent City, and of course at Destiny's Bridge screenings and events as well. If you can't make it in person, and you don't happen to have the special printer hardware - there are many different online services (ex. BuildASign.com) that will print and ship a sticker for about $3.
Tent City Bumper Stickers - ranging from serious to religious to political to downright silly. What better way is there to promote a cause?
Tweak 'em, print 'em, stick 'em where you want.
Join our TC-BS (Tent City Bumper Stickers) Facebook Group to help brainstorm new ideas or post your design.
If these images get cut off for width, press Ctrl-Minus to zoom out your browser:
We're ordering some bulk-printed right now to hand out to visitors to Tent City, and of course at Destiny's Bridge screenings and events as well. If you can't make it in person, and you don't happen to have the special printer hardware - there are many different online services (ex. BuildASign.com) that will print and ship a sticker for about $3.
Last edited:
Alex Libman
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Messages
- 1,423
Here is an example of some of the speed bumps that I deal with in my online advocacy of Tent City...
There is this character who calls "him"self "Chris" ([email protected]), who has made many malicious and demonstrably false online comments about Tent City. This includes comments on a local spam and fascist propoganda rag called "The Lakewood Scoop", in whose site's comments section "he" can lie unanswered, as my detailed and tediously-factual comments are always resentfully edited or deleted. "He" has tried to vandalize our wiki, excibiting much stupidity in the process. He also tries to poke me every few days via e-mail...
"He" claims to be a Tent City resident who expects to get free housing for a year, and is senselessly afraid that I'll get in the way of his mooching. I have reasons to wager that the reality is even more pathetic - that "he" is a made-up persona, most likely used by more than one person, created by political interests who want Tent City bulldozed. Here's "his" latest e-mail (with my added emphasis), which seems to be a response to a nasty comments exchange that "he" initiated on Tent City's Google+ Reviews Page:
This is typical nonsense, but the accusation that I've been "brainwashed" by Minister Steve Brigham warrants a response, not only to "him" but as publicly as possible... So, here's my open reply:
There is this character who calls "him"self "Chris" ([email protected]), who has made many malicious and demonstrably false online comments about Tent City. This includes comments on a local spam and fascist propoganda rag called "The Lakewood Scoop", in whose site's comments section "he" can lie unanswered, as my detailed and tediously-factual comments are always resentfully edited or deleted. "He" has tried to vandalize our wiki, excibiting much stupidity in the process. He also tries to poke me every few days via e-mail...
"He" claims to be a Tent City resident who expects to get free housing for a year, and is senselessly afraid that I'll get in the way of his mooching. I have reasons to wager that the reality is even more pathetic - that "he" is a made-up persona, most likely used by more than one person, created by political interests who want Tent City bulldozed. Here's "his" latest e-mail (with my added emphasis), which seems to be a response to a nasty comments exchange that "he" initiated on Tent City's Google+ Reviews Page:
This is typical nonsense, but the accusation that I've been "brainwashed" by Minister Steve Brigham warrants a response, not only to "him" but as publicly as possible... So, here's my open reply:
Last edited:
Rothbardian Girl
Member
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2010
- Messages
- 1,784
I think the issue of homelessness in a libertarian society can actually get very thorny. Why is it acceptable, from a libertarian viewpoint, to homestead this land, but not "private" land that has been made inaccessible due to the state enforcing (private) claims to essentially abandoned property? Think of all the vacant lots in Detroit that could become thriving centers of mutual aid and libertarian charity. The only difference between Detroit and this particular case in New Jersey seems to be that the Detroit sites are not state parks... The justification for setting aside swaths of unimproved, truly publicly-owned land (think state or national parks) is typically that they have some sort of aesthetic value and everyone should get to enjoy them without the trappings of civilization. Who is anyone to say that this claim isn't any less legitimate than the justification for the state enforcing what is essentially "absentee landlordism"?
It is impossible to tell (like most things) how much of a problem homelessness would be in a truly free society. I think the answer stems from different conceptualizations of property rights and what is and isn't acceptable. If the goal is to maximize social welfare, then it seems as though the mutualist viewpoint (that there is actually such a thing as "absentee landlordism" and that it is a "problem") would be a good framework, but a more propertarian viewpoint would more easily dissolve into "inefficient" use of land and thus open the possibilities for "more" homelessness, I would think.
Anyway, very interesting topic, but I'm not sure I agree with the logic that squatting on public land is any more different than squatting on abandoned privately-held land in principle.
It is impossible to tell (like most things) how much of a problem homelessness would be in a truly free society. I think the answer stems from different conceptualizations of property rights and what is and isn't acceptable. If the goal is to maximize social welfare, then it seems as though the mutualist viewpoint (that there is actually such a thing as "absentee landlordism" and that it is a "problem") would be a good framework, but a more propertarian viewpoint would more easily dissolve into "inefficient" use of land and thus open the possibilities for "more" homelessness, I would think.
Anyway, very interesting topic, but I'm not sure I agree with the logic that squatting on public land is any more different than squatting on abandoned privately-held land in principle.
helmuth_hubener
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2007
- Messages
- 9,484
Because, Rothbardian, there is a difference between "essentially" abandoned property and "actually" abandoned property.
There is a spectrum of abandonment, and at some point the land becomes rehomesteadable; you're absolutely right. Given our current social conventions, and the way humans use property, and the length of the human lifespan, that point is not just two or three years, especially if major and substantial improvements (such as a house built) have been made. If the houses stay vacant for another 7 years and are crumbling away, then the point becomes debatable, and justice may indeed be served by allowing people to re-homestead it.
This guy agrees:
http://mises.org/media/4692/Use-It-or-Lose-It-Extensions-to-Lockean-Homesteading-Theory
Alex Libman
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Messages
- 1,423
Thank you very much.
Will try my best to keep this thread updated, though unfortunately my time is very limited...
This thread expresses my personal positions and activism. Tent City itself, and any/all associated organizations, officially do not endorse any political positions.
For complete news coverage of our Tent City saga, please LIKE our Facebook Page. Please help spread the word about Tent City by sharing, and inviting all your friends to our Facebook page. If you run your own Web-site, social networking page, blog, an online radio show, etc - coverage of our Tent City would be much appreciated!
angelatc
Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2007
- Messages
- 50,703
Last edited:
Alex Libman
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Messages
- 1,423
"Rothbardian Girl" isn't being very Rothbardian...
First of all, I make a strict distinction between the terms "squatting" and "homesteading". The former primarily means trespassing on Private Property (although it has occasionally been mis-applied to the oxymoron of "public property" as well). The latter is bringing natural resources that have no legitimate prior owner into the economy through your management and labor.
All existence should ideally be privately owned as soon as it enters into the reach of the human economy, and thus becomes a part of our civilization. (And, if there be rational and sentient extraterrestrial / "artificial" / non-human intelligence, the same negative Rights should be recognized in them as well.) The universe is the body of existence, and the Free Market is its mind - a massively-parallel neural network of individual self-owning self-directing materialistic economic actors like ourselves. An unfree market is a mind that is broken and bound for self-destruction, as evolution finds a way to route around it. Only through consequentialist incentives can this mind maintain emergence - achieve stability and growth. (My lengthy epistemological rants on evolutionary pragmatism and Rational Law can be found elsewhere, but are yet to be organized into a single book.)
So I am highly skeptical of any claim about "abandoned" Private Property. Who are we to say that it is "abandoned"? If there is a specific individual / contractual entity (corporation) with a legitimate claim of ownership, then it's up to them to decide whether their Property is to collect dust or be used for something (in our humble opinion) more constructive. Sometimes it makes sense to leave a lot of land as-is while you're putting together a plan of what to do with it - that is more efficient than starting one thing and then demolishing when a better idea comes along. As with making homesteading claims (i.e. landing a beacon on an asteroid), there should be specific protocols for reasserting ownership, and I think that in a free society (i.e. without property taxes, etc) a property owner failing to keep up with them would be a very rare thing. This is hardly an issue worth discussing.
The forested land upon which the Tent City of Lakewood Township, NJ is situated -- municipal block #961.02, lot #3 (119.7 acres) and lot #4 (20.23 acres) -- used to be Private Property, but was stolen by the government thugs many decades ago due to non-payment of protection money ("taxes"); and, as I understand, the past owners are long gone... It became municipally-owned "public property" - a contradiction in terms. This land sat unused (not a part of a "public park", of which Lakewood has plenty), while Lakewood's population skyrocketed (the fastest growing town in the most densely populated state). Government failure has resulted in jobs leaving the area, and the cost of shelter skyrocketing through the roof.
From the aesthetic point of view, the presence of Tent City has destroyed only a tiny fraction of the trees on that land, and I would argue that a well-managed community of tents / shanties / "tiny houses" amidst the woods is much more aesthetically pleasing than woods where no one can go to appreciate their beauty. The government has done much to sabotage Tent City's potential - it could have been a much cleaner and greener place than it is today...
I agree that our issue is indeed very thorny. I'm not trying to set a precedent that anyone can homestead any "public land" by simply planting a flag - for now this should be managed on case-by-case basis. But I am calling for the ownership of this land, upon Tent City is situated, to be transferred to an NGO that will run a well-managed homeless camp, as a gradualist step in the right direction. We've been here for over 7 years. We've built Tent City. The government can't afford to house all the homeless. Homeless people are victims of government intervention that drastically increases the cost of rent. Even on a pragmatic level, I don't see any better solution than for the government to recognize our homesteading claim.
I know that pragmatic case-by-case solutions aren't pretty, but that's the best we can do right now. I am a gradualist. I firmly believe that waving a magic wand to make all involuntary government disappear in an instant would do more harm than good, as people are still uneducated, and therefore markets will need time to adjust. The disappearance of government will happen gradually, through free trade, fragmentation, and intergovernmental competition, as the more socialist regions lose brains and capital to the more capitalist ones and are eventually forced to reform. These reforms need to be managed wisely. (Unless of course there's an all-powerful competition-stifling World Government - then the human race is fucked.)
Government is cancer, but taking a chainsaw and cutting out every bit of cancerous tissue at once will kill the patient. The way to cure cancer is through nanobots that gradually eat the cancer (government and its coercive monopolies) and let healthy tissue (businesses and NGO's) grow to take their place. I am here in the battle between the living cell that is Tent City, and the bulldozer-powered cancerous disease that is the Welfare State.
First of all, I make a strict distinction between the terms "squatting" and "homesteading". The former primarily means trespassing on Private Property (although it has occasionally been mis-applied to the oxymoron of "public property" as well). The latter is bringing natural resources that have no legitimate prior owner into the economy through your management and labor.
All existence should ideally be privately owned as soon as it enters into the reach of the human economy, and thus becomes a part of our civilization. (And, if there be rational and sentient extraterrestrial / "artificial" / non-human intelligence, the same negative Rights should be recognized in them as well.) The universe is the body of existence, and the Free Market is its mind - a massively-parallel neural network of individual self-owning self-directing materialistic economic actors like ourselves. An unfree market is a mind that is broken and bound for self-destruction, as evolution finds a way to route around it. Only through consequentialist incentives can this mind maintain emergence - achieve stability and growth. (My lengthy epistemological rants on evolutionary pragmatism and Rational Law can be found elsewhere, but are yet to be organized into a single book.)
So I am highly skeptical of any claim about "abandoned" Private Property. Who are we to say that it is "abandoned"? If there is a specific individual / contractual entity (corporation) with a legitimate claim of ownership, then it's up to them to decide whether their Property is to collect dust or be used for something (in our humble opinion) more constructive. Sometimes it makes sense to leave a lot of land as-is while you're putting together a plan of what to do with it - that is more efficient than starting one thing and then demolishing when a better idea comes along. As with making homesteading claims (i.e. landing a beacon on an asteroid), there should be specific protocols for reasserting ownership, and I think that in a free society (i.e. without property taxes, etc) a property owner failing to keep up with them would be a very rare thing. This is hardly an issue worth discussing.
The forested land upon which the Tent City of Lakewood Township, NJ is situated -- municipal block #961.02, lot #3 (119.7 acres) and lot #4 (20.23 acres) -- used to be Private Property, but was stolen by the government thugs many decades ago due to non-payment of protection money ("taxes"); and, as I understand, the past owners are long gone... It became municipally-owned "public property" - a contradiction in terms. This land sat unused (not a part of a "public park", of which Lakewood has plenty), while Lakewood's population skyrocketed (the fastest growing town in the most densely populated state). Government failure has resulted in jobs leaving the area, and the cost of shelter skyrocketing through the roof.
From the aesthetic point of view, the presence of Tent City has destroyed only a tiny fraction of the trees on that land, and I would argue that a well-managed community of tents / shanties / "tiny houses" amidst the woods is much more aesthetically pleasing than woods where no one can go to appreciate their beauty. The government has done much to sabotage Tent City's potential - it could have been a much cleaner and greener place than it is today...
I agree that our issue is indeed very thorny. I'm not trying to set a precedent that anyone can homestead any "public land" by simply planting a flag - for now this should be managed on case-by-case basis. But I am calling for the ownership of this land, upon Tent City is situated, to be transferred to an NGO that will run a well-managed homeless camp, as a gradualist step in the right direction. We've been here for over 7 years. We've built Tent City. The government can't afford to house all the homeless. Homeless people are victims of government intervention that drastically increases the cost of rent. Even on a pragmatic level, I don't see any better solution than for the government to recognize our homesteading claim.
I know that pragmatic case-by-case solutions aren't pretty, but that's the best we can do right now. I am a gradualist. I firmly believe that waving a magic wand to make all involuntary government disappear in an instant would do more harm than good, as people are still uneducated, and therefore markets will need time to adjust. The disappearance of government will happen gradually, through free trade, fragmentation, and intergovernmental competition, as the more socialist regions lose brains and capital to the more capitalist ones and are eventually forced to reform. These reforms need to be managed wisely. (Unless of course there's an all-powerful competition-stifling World Government - then the human race is fucked.)
Government is cancer, but taking a chainsaw and cutting out every bit of cancerous tissue at once will kill the patient. The way to cure cancer is through nanobots that gradually eat the cancer (government and its coercive monopolies) and let healthy tissue (businesses and NGO's) grow to take their place. I am here in the battle between the living cell that is Tent City, and the bulldozer-powered cancerous disease that is the Welfare State.
Last edited:
helmuth_hubener
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2007
- Messages
- 9,484
But it isn't anyone else's either. It ostensibly "belongs" to the government. Which pretends that it actually "belongs" to the people. But the government has no legitimate business managing amusement areas, such as parks, golf courses, forests, waterslides, laser tag arenas, etc. And so it probably is not illegitimate to squat there. Though you could say it belongs to the tax payers who are getting ripped off to pay for it, and so if the squatters are depriving them of enjoyment that is some kind of minor trespass.
Plus property tax.
You're in Michigan. You should know better. $1 + property taxes is no deal for a house in Detroit. At least, for many of these houses in Detroit. Which is why they go unsold. If they were a good deal, someone would buy them. But I, and anyone else intelligent who has heard the rumors of super-cheap houses and then actually looked into them, quickly realizes the reality.
angelatc
Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2007
- Messages
- 50,703
It does not matter who else (either singular or plural) owns the land. He does not own it, and therefore has no right to it.
Detroit tax waivers: http://www.detroitmi.gov/DepartmentsandAgencies/RenaissanceZones/FAQs.aspx
Last edited:
amy31416
Member
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2007
- Messages
- 22,978
Detroit property will NEVER be a bargain until the entire gov't of Detroit is shit-canned and replaced with reasonable people. Even if there's a tax waiver, they're shutting down small businesses and adding more penalties, while the police are no better than the criminals.
Similar threads
