'Food for Thought'

[ownaproperty]

How many different meenings does ownership have?

This is not a trick question, I am asking if the readers here know if they actually own land or do they just think they do?

What does ownership mean to YOU!

[xris]

A slightly strange post but one which does nevertheless lead to some interesting little facts.

Suspicious as I often am, I cannot help but wonder if there is a hidden reason for your post. Please put my suspicion at rest.

To keep the ball rolling, here are a few comments:

(Maori land is a complicated issue which I want to avoid here and for the sake of simplicity I will assume does not exist. Yes, I realise this is a dangerous and potentially misleading assumption to make, but I will make it anyway.)

All land in NZ is ultimately owned by the Crown.

Even the cleanest form of Title – fee simple – is not that clean, as…

All gold deposits under your land belong to the crown.

Numerous local and government laws restrict what you can and cannot do on your land: cut down certain trees; plant certain plants; build any sort of property you want to, and so on.

How high does your control over the air space above your land extend?

Can you legally prevent a stranger from walking up to the front door of your home on your land?

You have clear title to the land and improvements of your rental property, so why are you restricted from doing whatever you want, whenever you want, on that property?

The list goes on and on. Somebody else can take over now, please.

[ownaproperty]

Allodial Title or Title in Allodium

Hello Xris, tell me if you don’t think you own it why do you say it is yours, isn't that ultimately not telling the truth? I understand this puts you on the spot; it is really interesting once you start thinking about it though. I hope you are not offended.

Can a tenant say, the house they are living in is "their house"?

Has anyone here heard, of allodial title or title in allodium or found evidence of the land they are in control of, once having that title?

Regards

Sam

[ownaproperty]

Sorry about only having questions, I suppose I am looking for specifically defined answers. I am not happy with grey areas!!

So if you have to ask permission to do what ever to the land either build, alter a window, put in another kitchen, what ever . . . . . .. . are you actually asking permission of the owner?

Isn’t it in reality that when we think we purchase a property we are actually only purchasing a lease with the govt? And the value of the lease is relative to the purchase price that you have exchanged with the previous owner of the lease? And the lease is the rates you pay every year?

Is there anyone here old enough to tell us how the ballot block allocations at the end of WW II concerning farm land. I have an understanding that the govt just took land off people and gave it to returned service men who had no idea about farming or if a lot of them even wanted to.

I have also heard that in the cities people had to split their houses up and build in porches to provide extra rooms for people without homes and if they didn’t comply there were interesting consequences. Can someone here shed some more light on that subject?

Regards

Sam

[drelly]

Hi Sam and welcome.

The trouble is that life is full of grey areas. It's all very well to debate what ownership really is and if you can ever truly own anything, but in the end, does it really matter?

I'm not concerned about the Government owning the mineral rights to my property or that I only have rights up to a certain level of air space. I was not intending to mine or build the tower of babel. What does concern me is the ability to live relatively unfettered within the sphere of influence I intend for my property, ie; general living purposes. I can't take it with me when I kick the bucket.

[karla]

Well said Drelly.....

[CJ]

Ownership is title. some of those measures you mentioned (ballot block etc) would not occur now in my opinion. Confiscation can happen (motorways) but you will be compensated.

There are restrictions on your title but there are also restrictions on your life (ie. though shalt not murder -punishable by god and the state). Does that mean you are not alive?

I am not really sure what you are asking. yes there are restirctions but they are for teh beneift of all, including yourself. What if your neighbours did ....

[Aston]

When we hold title to a property, we're just guardians of the land until we either die or sell the title to somebody else. Title gives us exclusive use of the land (in most cases).

When I "own" a property I consider that I own the improvements only ie. the house upon the land etc. and I just have exclusive use of the land.

Yes there are restrictions just as there are restrictions on many things we own. eg. if we own a car and we choose to remove the windscreen because we like the fresh air we can't do it. If we own a gun we're not allowed to go into the street and shoot it into the air.

When we die we can't take the land with us but we can take the house, eg. we can burn it down if we choose to.

I'm not really sure where this thread is heading though?????


Aston.

[ownaproperty]

Thank you all, for what you have said, I am just after opinions to get an understanding of what you think ownership is. From what I see your opinions are that of the general population.
I suppose most people would say if you want to live in this society you have to think like the rest of us and comply and if you don’t comply that is to bad we will force you to do so.

I look at it like this “you either own it or you do not. It is the same as, you are pregnant or you are not, you are dead or you are alive. So if it is not yours to dispose of 100% why do you call it yours?

I have since heard that the govt compensated, the land grab (ballot blocks) for the govt valuation, a little one sided don’t you think. Isn’t it the most advanced societies that say “that will never happen to us” then soon enough it does. Here in Dunedin you get houses that have a govt valuation sometimes half of what it goes for on the open market.

It would be great to hear from someone who has been in a situation or remembers their parents going through it, where they have seen the govt take land from people for the “common good” and let us here all know how it really happened.

Food for thought?

[drelly]

Hey Sam,

What is the point of your question? Does it have any connection to you?

Ownership in it's most practical sense is a measure of what you can do with the land. And sure, your land can be taken from you for something like a roading project.

However, I can't see why are you bringing this up? Unless you're trying to learn something because of a situation you're involved in, then ultimately, all we can say is that we "own" property as long as no one else is strong enough to take it from us... whether by law or force.

This is pretty obvious isn't it???

cheers,
Dave.

[cube]

From wikipedia:

Allodial title is a concept in some systems of property law. It describes a situation where real property (i.e., land, buildings and fixtures) is owned free and clear of any encumbrances, including liens, mortgages and tax obligations. Allodial title is inalienable, in that it cannot be taken by any operation of law for any reason whatsoever. True allodial title is rare, with most property ownership in the common law world — primarily, the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand — is described more properly as being in fee simple. In particular, in the nations recognising Elizabeth II as sovereign, land is said to be "held of the Crown." In common legal use, allodial title is used to distinguish absolute ownership of land by individuals from feudal ownership, where property ownership is dependent on relationship to a lord or the sovereign. Webster's first dictionary says allodium is "land which is absolute property of the owner, real estate held in absolute independence, without being subject to any rent, service, or acknowledgement to a superior. It is thus opposed to feud. In England, there is no allodial land, all land being held of the king; but in the United States most lands are allodial."

Bascially, QE II has the ulitmate right to land where she is head of state (i.e. NZ).

Although, as Drelly says, if the Pentagon wants to take possession of a large part of your back yard, then who are you to argue.

Is the NZ govt obliged to pay compensation for land taken for motorways etc., or is it just politically expediant to do so !?

[cube]

Can a tenant say, the house they are living in is "their house"?

No, but generally they would (I would hope) call it "Home".

[ownaproperty]

Thank you!

It will be interesting to one day talk about who owns your labour.

[muppet]

Who owns your labour?....... the person who is paying for it.

[Aston]

Here we go again.....

I own my own labour.

I sell a solution or an outcome or a product.

Eg. if I were a carpenter, I use my labour to produce a fence or a concrete path. The person who hires me pays for the fence, which I create with my own skills and my own labour. I hire out my time and my labour but I don't sell it.

This thread is going nowhere.


Aston.