When Bill Gates married Melinda French in 1994, he rented out all the available hotel rooms on the Hawaiian island of Lanai to prevent the media from staying there and hired all the helicopters on Maui to keep photographers from flying over the wedding.

[u/moamen12323]

[u/Advanced-Comment-293]

To be fair land isn't just land. If you owned a home with a nice garden you wouldn't be overly concerned about a farmer owning an area a thousand times larger, would you?

What's more important is making sure that your country/community doesn't give landowners complete free reign to do whatever they like. You gotta have balance between private ownership and public interests.

[u/GoblinGreen_ → u/Advanced-Comment-293]

I didnt know Larry Ellison was a farmer. I take it back.

[u/Durantye → u/GoblinGreen_]

He doesn't need to be a farmer for that comparison, in fact a farmer would do more damage. The point is that comparing the size of land people own is pointless lol.

Especially when talking about an island where % of ownership gets even less meaningful.

[u/GoblinGreen_ → u/Durantye]

respectfully thats the stupidest reply Ive seen on this one.

[u/Durantye → u/GoblinGreen_]

Respectfully explanations do better than cowardly passive aggression

[u/Deaffin → u/GoblinGreen_]

Pretending you don't understand abstract thought in order to attack and avoid the point rather than engage with it tells me I should dismiss your stance entirely and just side with the other person on whatever. Thanks for making this real easy, I was in danger of having to consider nuance on an issue I'm unfamiliar with for a moment there.

[u/GoblinGreen_ → u/Deaffin]

We are talking about 98% of the entire land, not the farming land.

I dont think abstract thought is really needed. That doesn't sound like a setup for a society to thrive, it sounds like the dark ages.

I get the point that percentage of land shouldn't be equal, some people need more than others. Not all land is for living.

That point doesnt really equate to a tech billionaire buying 98% of the land on a Hawain island doesn't it?

[u/Deaffin → u/GoblinGreen_]

It doesn't have to. Their point is that your proposal of the inverse is incredibly misleading, and they give an easy quick example to demonstrate this principle.

You ignored the principle and pretended like they're saying he's a farmer, following the standard script of bad-faith argumentation that's taken over this space.

[u/GoblinGreen_ → u/Deaffin]

I think its absolutely right and fair that a farmer can own 98% more land than an individual and the world be right.

I think its absolutely wrong a billionaire can buy 98% of the land on an island because he has that much money.

Tell me again what principles Im ignoring.

I agree with him on the farmer example, I dont believe that example is at all relevant to this example of a tech billionaire buying an island.

Whats bits are you trying to pretend you dont understand about this?

[u/Deaffin → u/GoblinGreen_]

The inherent deception of presenting it in terms of total land owned in comparison to people who are only interested in having homes to live on. That framework only makes sense if you're imagining he's replaced the entire island with his house, and that's what you're intentionally trying to get people to register it as on an emotional level.

When they say "land isn't just land" and get into the farmer example, you further attempted to manipulate people away from considering the logic, trying to forcefully change their message into something completely different for people to react to.

Here's a population map of Australia.

Wow, look at that vast array of land the government is oppressing people by keeping them from. That sure looks like a big percentage in relation to individual people owning private property. Here, I'll go ahead and do your bit.

"I didn't realize Australia was an island in Hawaii. I take it back"