Land rent ad infinitum, ad nauseum

[FrankChodorov]

they [government] wanted to be able to steal from others to give to me

stealing connotes someone's private property is being used against their will.

are you saying the town wanted to force some residence to use their well to give water to you?

or are you saying that the town wanted to restrict the use of water from others so that you were not economically disadvantaged?

[CNHT]

they [government] wanted to be able to steal from others to give to me

stealing connotes someone's private property is being used against their will.

YES

are you saying the town wanted to force some residence to use their well to give water to you?

YES, not to me specifically, but to use as they saw fit with regard to redistribution.

or are you saying that the town wanted to restrict the use of water from others so that you were not economically disadvantaged?

They did not say this in the bill. The Rep who sponsored it stated this example, which is worse, at the hearing:

"If someone has a well that can support others, and did not do the 'right thing' we would want to be able to take it".

DO you see how bad that is??

By the way, both my neighbors who have superior pressure have offered to hook me up with a hose temporarily while I  get another well dug, in case I run completely dry. BUT THIS IS COMPLETELY VOLUNTARILY.

[CNHT]

OK here is the bill. It was to take private property by eminent domain and the sponsor explain that this meant WELLS specifically.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2005/hb0572.html

Thanks to many of us here, it still says  "No regional water district shall have the authority to take property by eminent domain" instead of
"A regional water district shall have the authority to take property by eminent domain."

Are you scared enough now?

[FrankChodorov]

they can:

(a) rightfully restrict someone(s) from using the water in their private well if it can be proved the person(s) use is infringing on others' equal access rights

but they can not:

(b) demand that someone share it after it comes out of their well.

of course choice (b) is much easier adminsitratively than (a)...but (a) does require that they (the state) actively monitor the amount being privately withdrawn.

if you didn't want to press your case (that your rights are being infringed and had proof) then you are going to be economically disadvantaged the additional cost of drilling another well.

theoretically the best system would be for the public trustee along with scientists to determine how much water could be used without harming the common asset itself (sustainable yield) and then sell the annual permits on the open market and distribute the proceeds to the individual owners equally.

then no one is economically harmed and the asset is protected.

[FrankChodorov]

OK here is the bill. It was to take private property by eminent domain and the sponsor explain that this meant WELLS specifically.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2005/hb0572.html

Thanks to many of us here, it still says  "No regional water district shall have the authority to take property by eminent domain" instead of
"A regional water district shall have the authority to take property by eminent domain."

Are you scared enough now?

there is no need to take property by eminent domain because the state is the public trustee of the groundwater which is all owned in common.

the state therefore already has the proper authority to restrict person(s) use if it can be shown that it is upholding someone else's individual equal access rights to the same.

here is another bill that passed having to do with large (57K) groundwater withdrawls...

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2005/HB0069.html

[CNHT]

OK here is the bill. It was to take private property by eminent domain and the sponsor explain that this meant WELLS specifically.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2005/hb0572.html

Thanks to many of us here, it still says  "No regional water district shall have the authority to take property by eminent domain" instead of
"A regional water district shall have the authority to take property by eminent domain."

Are you scared enough now?

there is no need to take property by eminent domain because the state is the public trustee of the groundwater which is all owned in common.

the state therefore already has the proper authority to restrict person(s) use if it can be shown that it is upholding someone else's individual equal access rights to the same.

here is another bill that passed having to do with large (57K) groundwater withdrawls...

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2005/HB0069.html

This bill has nothing to do with the fact that here where I live, they may NOT take my private well. And neither can the state, regardless of what that bills says. That bill refers to the state draining water, especially in the form of a wetland or pond, and I don't own a pond. It is not taking of private property as the other bill was. And it states that there will be a hearing on it before it is done with due process and 91-A considerations.

No one is restricting my neighbors use of water even though the addition of their wells has put mine down to a trickle. As I said, it's my job to install another one if I want more water.
The bill I cited wanted to take my PROPERTY. I think that is very different. If the state is so worried about preserving my 'collective' rights, why would we need hearings to determine what the outcome of their taking of such large quantities of water? Apparently this bill is trying to help protect the residents from any bad result of that.

[FrankChodorov]

they may NOT take my private well

but they can restrict the amount of water you are taking via your well and the only way to do that is at the wellhead in your house by monitoring the amount you take.

they can not restrict the amount flowing into your pipe only out of...

No one is restricting my neighbors use of water even though the addition of their wells has put mine down to a trickle

the state could - legal, rightfully and justfully.

preserving my 'collective' rights

there are no collective rights being discussed here as collective rights are group rights.

if the water were owned collectively you would have had to get permission to drill a well prior to drilling and every group member (or their delegated authority) would have to consent.

why do you continue to allude that collective ownership and ownership in common are the same?

they are opposite...it only hurts your argument.

[CNHT]

I still assert:

they may NOT take my private well

but they can restrict the amount of water you are taking via your well and the only way to do that is at the wellhead in your house by monitoring the amount you take.

And I say NO THEY CAN'T because the bill was defeated. IF this were a business zone and I were a car wash....perhaps. But this is a residence.

the state could - legal, rightfully and justfully.

UM think again. For what REASON? A homeowner can only pump so much water. They don't seem concerned that my neighbors can draw more than I can? What legal right would they have to just take my water supply? They'd have to tangle with the butt of my Ruger first.

there are no collective rights being discussed here as collective rights are group rights.
if the water were owned collectively you would have had to get permission to drill a well prior to drilling and every group member (or their delegated authority) would have to consent.

Well I did not have to get permission as the property is mine. So why are you saying the town or state can regulate it without legislation such as was defeated? You are confusing everyone. MY well is NOT SUBJECT TO collective rights as it is on private property in my opinion and in the opinion of all the others that stood against that bill which sought to make my well public property.

why do you continue to allude that collective ownership and ownership in common are the same?
they are opposite...it only hurts your argument.

I am not. But you keep telling me the state can regulate my well and I assume because you think it's their right. I am simply saying that the town and state, as it stands now cannot regulate my private well at my residence. I cannot conduct a major business here, so there is not going to be a chance that I will build a car wash and use up the whole aquifer so what would be the reason to seize or regulate my well except for redistribution?

[Fluff and Stuff]

Did I ever say I lived in Bedford? Hmmmm.. You must have me mixed up with someone else. (By the way, I just banned someone from another board for posting personal info without the users permission ? it's netiquette you know?)

What about here,

http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=2397.msg41974#msg41974
http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=729.msg8926#msg8926
http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=465.msg7496#msg7496
http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=761.msg10405#msg10405
http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=748.msg9653#msg9653

[FrankChodorov]

NO THEY CAN'T because the bill was defeated. IF this were a business zone and I were a car wash....perhaps. But this is a residence

it has nothing to do with the bill or whether or not you are a business.

if it is determined that your use of water from the common asset (ground water) infringes on the individual equal access opportunity rights of someone else the state has the legal authority TODAY to protect the infringed parties individual equal access rights.

period.

For what REASON? A homeowner can only pump so much water

it doesn't matter how much water the homeowner CAN pump it matter whether or not the water the homeowner IS pumping is infringing on someone else's rights.

They don't seem concerned that my neighbors can draw more than I can?

someone would have to make a claim of economic harm...

What legal right would they have to just take my water supply?

there is no such thing as "my water supply" as it relates to the private wells tapping into the groundwater in NH just as no one could call Lake Sunapee "my lake"

you only have an individual equal access opportunity right to the groundwater SO LONG AS your access/use does not infringe on anyone else's INDIVIDUAL right to the same.

I did not have to get permission as the property is mine.

it does not have to do with whether the property is yours but that you have an individual equal access claim to the common asset.

you could pull up a tanker to the public docks at Lake Sunapee and suck up 2000 gallons if you wanted and no one could stop you unless it could be shown tht you have materially harmed someone else.

So why are you saying the town or state can regulate it without legislation such as was defeated?

because it is a known fact that the groundwater in NH is owned in common and the state is the public trustee.

MY well is NOT SUBJECT TO collective rights as it is on private property in my opinion and in the opinion of all the others that stood against that bill which sought to make my well public property

talk about trying to confuse the issue...

the well you drilled is your private property
the groundwater you receive in your well is owned in common and you being a resident of the state have an INDIVIDUAL legal right to acces and use so long as you don't infringe on the equal rights of others.

there are NO collective rights at issue here...

what in your opinion would define "infringement" in this context?

if the amount of water flowing into your pipe can not be physically restricted (it is impossible) how else do you think the state is going to be able to protect the equal rights of other individuals but to restrict the amount of water you use at the well head?

metering!

you keep telling me the state can regulate my well and I assume because you think it's their right

what would be the reason to seize or regulate my well except for redistribution?

ah let's see...

how about to protect the rights of those your use may infringe upon?

[Heyduke]

Did I ever say I lived in Bedford? Hmmmm.. You must have me mixed up with someone else. (By the way, I just banned someone from another board for posting personal info without the users permission ? it's netiquette you know?)

What about here,

http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=2397.msg41974#msg41974
http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=729.msg8926#msg8926
http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=465.msg7496#msg7496
http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=761.msg10405#msg10405
http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=748.msg9653#msg9653

Thank you--I didn't want to labor the point, but was quite certain that I had seen a Bedford reference in this thread...which apparently edited out... 

Regardless--the onus is not upon me or any other reader or poster--netiquette be damned.  This is the interweb, and what you post that is not under copyright restrictions is public domain. 

Post at your own acceptable risk levels. 

I commute through Bedford daily and live within a mile of its hallowed borders.  I could not possibly care less about you or your legal whereabouts, how many guns you have and how much you are deluded about your well. 

Furthermore, being friendly with your little clique does not give you the right to admonish those who are not in it.  Nor does selectively being friendly make you a friendly person. 

Good luck with that.   

[Dreepa]

Whenever I read about the Georgist I always get a headache.

Am I alone in this?
Is that all they ever think about?
Is it a cult? ???

[Fluff and Stuff]

Whenever I read about the Georgist I always get a headache.

Am I alone in this?
Is that all they ever think about?
Is it a cult? ???

No, you are not alone.  They bother me to no end.

[CNHT]

if it is determined that your use of water from the common asset (ground water) infringes on the individual equal access opportunity rights of someone else the state has the legal authority TODAY to protect the infringed parties individual equal access rights. period.

Um, how would I be infringing on the rights of others when I am using my well that is on my property? Apparently my neighbors, who are drawing so much water that it's made mine go to a trickle, are not considered to be infringing. I wonder why? I have more land, 2 acres in fact, and I can drill another well in another spot which is what I intend to do.

someone would have to make a claim of economic harm...

Ok so you're saying I can claim 'economic harm' against my neighbors because my water flow is so much less than theirs? This is  poppycock!
I doubt anyone here would support my doing that....sounds like socialism to me.
I can just see me now, going to the nanny town or state and demanding that my neighbors use less water from the wells on their own property. <d'oh>

there is no such thing as "my water supply" as it relates to the private wells tapping into the groundwater in NH just as no one could call Lake Sunapee "my lake"
you only have an individual equal access opportunity right to the groundwater SO LONG AS your access/use does not infringe on anyone else's INDIVIDUAL right to the same.

Well if they already have the rights to my well, why was there an attempt to pass an eminent domain law to take private wells?

it does not have to do with whether the property is yours but that you have an individual equal access claim to the common asset.

Once again, my well is NOT a common asset, thanks to many people in the FSP.

you could pull up a tanker to the public docks at Lake Sunapee and suck up 2000 gallons if you wanted and no one could stop you unless it could be shown tht you have materially harmed someone else.

But we are not talking about the lake, we are talking about wells on private property! Geesh!

....it is a known fact that the groundwater in NH is owned in common and the state is the public trustee.

They still cannot manage private wells....sorry!

the well you drilled is your private property - the groundwater you receive in your well is owned in common and you being a resident of the state have an INDIVIDUAL legal right to acces and use so long as you don't infringe on the equal rights of others.

The reason they wanted to be able to TAKE THE WELL was not because of infringement but for redistribution and management as they saw fit! I thought I made that clear?
No one has been determined to be infringing upon anything.

there are NO collective rights at issue here...

And that means.... ?

what in your opinion would define "infringement" in this context?

Infringement? I doubt anyone would do anything to harm their own wells and using MORE water than me is NOT infringment of my rights. We are not talking about infringement. We are talking about the state wanting to own and control something that the homeowners have on their private property that they have paid for...My neighbors are not infringing, they are just lucky that their wells produce a lot of water, and in this case more than mine. I have the right to drill another one if I want, as I have plenty of land to do it. I don't have the right to ask the state to take away their water and give it to me!!!!

if the amount of water flowing into your pipe can not be physically restricted (it is impossible) how else do you think the state is going to be able to protect the equal rights of other individuals but to restrict the amount of water you use at the well head? metering!

GASP! So now you're advocating that the state control my well with METERING? They would have to deal with the Ruger first. :-)
And your positions, sir, would seem to be worse than that of a socialist!    

[CNHT]

Did I ever say I lived in Bedford? Hmmmm.. You must have me mixed up with someone else. (By the way, I just banned someone from another board for posting personal info without the users permission ? it's netiquette you know?)

What about here,

http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=2397.msg41974#msg41974
http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=729.msg8926#msg8926
http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=465.msg7496#msg7496
http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=761.msg10405#msg10405
http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=748.msg9653#msg9653

We help people all over the state, doesn't mean I LIVE there.