[manicdee]

What is the practical outcome of this?

Do I camp outside Microsoft headquarters then walk in on day 1 of year 101 and say, “this is mine now”?

Where I live we have leasehold land so titles theoretically extinguish after 99 years. What has happened in practise is that the lease just auto-renews, making the situation no different to freehold apart from the paperwork.

[mcv]

> Do I camp outside Microsoft headquarters then walk in on day 1 of year 101 and say, “this is mine now”?

You'd probably have to outbid Microsoft for it. I don't think land should ever be free for the taking for whoever claims it first; It should belong to society and you purchase use rights from society.

[robertlagrant]

There is no "society", though. Who actually owns it and decides? The state? A local body? Who do you give all the power over the land to, if you're removing its ownership from individuals?

[ChuckNorris89]

The state owns the land and will lease it to any individual, with the price being determined by the free market, same how property prices are determined today. Whoever can afford the most, gets it.

Best of both worlds. You discourage real estate speculative and hoarding for rent seeking purposes and still have the free market competition determining the prices.

Once your lease is up you can renew it at current market prices if you want it and can afford it. If not, then you make way for someone else to take up the lease.

[robertlagrant]

I don't know why you'd want a system where a rich person can take the land your house is on if they can pay £1 more than you for it every so often, unless you're a fan of the feudal system.

I also don't see how it discourages speculative investment. If nothing you own is really yours for very long then you're much more likely to have your property bought from under you if it's in a desirable area. As an investor I would want to do that if I believe I could rent it out at a profit.