As for the curiosity of people like Tom, again, perhaps you need to check up on the trends of this, the real world, and see just how dedicated a group of people with time on their hands and the insatiable need to violate social norms in a non-destructive fashion can be. For reference, I point you to the various urban exploration sites google references, which document at great length the exploration of 'boring' areas by those who find such often pointless meandering exciting and worthwhile. These people represent a technologically savvy and sometimes intellectually fixated group who use the latest technology, ranging from satellite tracking devices to the full modern array of portable electronic toys and gadgets to uncover the great mystery of storm drains and grafitii. These are people who will gladly embark on an 8 hour crawl through disused storm sewers merely to ensure that, yes, the grate on the other end does not in fact open onto a parallel universe full of goodness, light, and unfettered access to alcohol.
Besides such people, whose dedication to uncovering the conspiracies underlying sewage routing through major urban areas I heartily applaud, you have an array of investigative reporters, for whom this story would be a career maker, interested and angry locals, real-estate speculators, enviromental activists interested in the preserve, anti-environmental saboteurs interested in destroying it, vandals, punk kids looking for a place to screw, drunks, the homeless insane, police, local authorities both civic and county, etc, etc, etc. All of these people would have a keen interest in determining just what lies inside that boundary, which is quite conspicuously guarded, funded, and otherwise made all the more alluring.
The price of land in the 70s is irrelevant, and I'm curious as to when the dollar 'collapsed', exactly, to justify this expenditure. Moreover, if it had, the billionaire's fortune would not likely have survived either. If your refer to the dollar going off the metal standards, then you clearly weren't taught much about economics and misunderstand the exact nature of a currency-based economy, where the actual value of money is determined by acceptance of its value, rather than the arbitrary amount of gold or silver held by the treasury. Going off the metal standards in fact enabled the United States to rise to the pinnacle of global finance, and you would be hard pressed to find any modern, industrialized nation that does not in fact use such 'fake' money. The 70s were, for all their turmoil, a very mild distruption in the economic process of the nation, not comparable in scale or severity to the Reagan 80s, the great Depression, or earlier gold and speculatory crises.
At any rate, the land value at the time of purchase is, as I said, irrelvant. The value *today*, on which taxes must be paid, is all that is relevant. The 'preserve' is not a government managed institution as you insinuate, because that would put it under the surveillance of the Forest Service, the National Parks people, and other busybody agencies that have an imperative to, amongst other things, make money. Even the most 'preserved' of the national forests and parks allow various and sundry money making opportunies, including but not limited to, hunting, fishing, logging, mining, tourism, camping, and various vehicular rentals, assuming they do not sell large tracts of the land for real estate. In order to actually ensure privacy, the land is in fact privately owned. But this presents another problem, for routine assessment of private property is necessary and required for tax purposes. Assayers, surveyors, etc, would all be on the property at the least upon every major revision to the state tax code. California may not believe in propety taxes, but believe me, as a former resident of this state, Pennsylvania does.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2004-08-09 12:35 pm (UTC)Besides such people, whose dedication to uncovering the conspiracies underlying sewage routing through major urban areas I heartily applaud, you have an array of investigative reporters, for whom this story would be a career maker, interested and angry locals, real-estate speculators, enviromental activists interested in the preserve, anti-environmental saboteurs interested in destroying it, vandals, punk kids looking for a place to screw, drunks, the homeless insane, police, local authorities both civic and county, etc, etc, etc. All of these people would have a keen interest in determining just what lies inside that boundary, which is quite conspicuously guarded, funded, and otherwise made all the more alluring.
The price of land in the 70s is irrelevant, and I'm curious as to when the dollar 'collapsed', exactly, to justify this expenditure. Moreover, if it had, the billionaire's fortune would not likely have survived either. If your refer to the dollar going off the metal standards, then you clearly weren't taught much about economics and misunderstand the exact nature of a currency-based economy, where the actual value of money is determined by acceptance of its value, rather than the arbitrary amount of gold or silver held by the treasury. Going off the metal standards in fact enabled the United States to rise to the pinnacle of global finance, and you would be hard pressed to find any modern, industrialized nation that does not in fact use such 'fake' money. The 70s were, for all their turmoil, a very mild distruption in the economic process of the nation, not comparable in scale or severity to the Reagan 80s, the great Depression, or earlier gold and speculatory crises.
At any rate, the land value at the time of purchase is, as I said, irrelvant. The value *today*, on which taxes must be paid, is all that is relevant. The 'preserve' is not a government managed institution as you insinuate, because that would put it under the surveillance of the Forest Service, the National Parks people, and other busybody agencies that have an imperative to, amongst other things, make money. Even the most 'preserved' of the national forests and parks allow various and sundry money making opportunies, including but not limited to, hunting, fishing, logging, mining, tourism, camping, and various vehicular rentals, assuming they do not sell large tracts of the land for real estate. In order to actually ensure privacy, the land is in fact privately owned. But this presents another problem, for routine assessment of private property is necessary and required for tax purposes. Assayers, surveyors, etc, would all be on the property at the least upon every major revision to the state tax code. California may not believe in propety taxes, but believe me, as a former resident of this state, Pennsylvania does.