I assumed Trump’s Freedom Cities was more of an American version of Charter Cities with clean new institutions and regulations. Your focus seems more on housing growth.
A few years ago I commented on a libertarian blog asking why Indian Reservations — with their various exemptions from federal and state regulations — couldn’t be used as a foundation for charter cities. More of a question than an actual suggestion. The libertarians became irate and accused me of literally being a communist. Still not sure why. Only thing I can think of is they saw my idea as a threat to their freedom initiatives in New Hampshire.
Final query: have you ever heard of something called capital homesteading? Or perhaps as the Economic Democracy Act (formerly known as the “Capital Homestead Act”)? I am not entirely sure I understand how this proposal would work, but it seems to involve the government providing some modest contribution to a new born's investment account at birth and the growth/dividends plus yearly additions end up providing a substantial capital base for each new citizen after 20 or more years, for education or retirement or ???. The government's initial capital input is reimbursed after some period and the remaining gains continue to grow.
Sounds like a "something for nothing" scheme and no requirement to demonstrate personal responsibility, but I may be misunderstanding the goal or the means involved.
My original capture of that explanation (in Word) is no longer an active link but these seem to cover the same basic idea, from my search at the Center for Economic and Social Justice web site: https://www.cesj.org/ .
Let's see, another thought: I suspect this is something that would wait until after the midterms, per your other posts on Trump's desired focus, etc. Use the intervening two years to examine and "solve" as many of the potential problem issues as we can ahead of actually passing and implementing the program. Plus it is also a program that the Dem's should still favor, whether they do or do not gain in the midterm election. They may just resist so the R's don't get the "credit" for the intiiative? Fools them, if they do that.
On the number and size of plots, I understand we are discussing "low income" housing, so some fraction of the program might even provide for partial credits in condos in lieu of plots. Still involves ownership and responsibilities to be productive citizens, etc. And stay away from the really large "projects" type buildings - maybe 3 stories high, 18 units total, or ??? Not a lifestyle I would prefer, but some folks would like the lower maintenance obligations, etc.
I also wonder about the net result from the granting of federal tax holiday periods [was that for the homesteaders and/or for the construction crews, etc.?]. The people needing and qualifying for this homestead award (not exactly a gift as it comes with associated responsibilities) are probably also in the lower socioeconomic range, but it seems if they are paying $166 (or slightly more?) per month and then getting the equivalent of that back in tax forgiveness, then it is a net gift? But hopefully not side stepping the aspects of responsibility and commitment this program is intended to provide and foster. Or perhaps your vision is of (mostly younger) people who have acquired some skills or training or education as part of their upward mobility, and are now ready to become homeowners and solid citizens, etc.?? They have or can get jobs as remote or local workers.
Would you have any restrictions on singles vs. cohabitating couples vs. married couples? With or without children?
Whether you or Trump have great minds, we will probably have to await the verdict of history to assess that, but we can grant that you both have very good minds, each with their respective pluses and minuses.
My initial thought was "what about water" and then you do assert they have plenty of underground acquifers. Other infrastructure and its distribution will still require close coordination with local and state authorities [although maybe they are used to a Big Gov presence in their face out in Nevada?].
As a fan of the architect Frank Lloyd Wright, I have reservations about a housing site as small as 5000 sq ft (50 x 100?). That is basically less than 1/8th acre. I lived on such a plot in Chicago and it was ok, but the yard was small and there was not much room for much of any outside enjoyment or activity. I am struggling to find room on a 1/2 acre lightly wooded parcel to put a house design I favor among the trees: if I go forward with this project, I will end up removing 6 rather nice trees to fit it in. Given the open spaces available in NV, I would suggest something closer to an acre per homestead, thus setting up township equivalents or "neighborhoods" of 600 or so plots and 1200+ people. This is also a large enough group to get and keep the attention of the politicians when required, at least if the citizens work together for common goals. As you mention, further land allowance for infrastructure, schools, police stations, etc. would also need to be provided, and that would also be granted "free" (?) to the locality? Would local officials also be required to construct the required facilities under similar agreements as for the homesteaders? [say 1 HS, 3 middle schools, 6 elementary schools, etc., to be built within 5 years to cover the needs of 3 to12(?) township neighborhoods? The existing non homesteading citizens are placed on the hook for those, although they may benefit from more people for other reasons.]
Opps: I forgot that a "towhship" was 6 miles square, or 36 sq miles, not a single sq mile. So maybe 30 to 34 neighborhoods per township, or 30 to 50 thousand people? A good sized town with the resources to provide most amenities people need or desire. Coupled to the larger major city nearby for those extra special needs, like sport standiums, etc. Build out one township while planning the next three townships, etc. per your trial and error approach.
I assumed Trump’s Freedom Cities was more of an American version of Charter Cities with clean new institutions and regulations. Your focus seems more on housing growth.
A few years ago I commented on a libertarian blog asking why Indian Reservations — with their various exemptions from federal and state regulations — couldn’t be used as a foundation for charter cities. More of a question than an actual suggestion. The libertarians became irate and accused me of literally being a communist. Still not sure why. Only thing I can think of is they saw my idea as a threat to their freedom initiatives in New Hampshire.
Final query: have you ever heard of something called capital homesteading? Or perhaps as the Economic Democracy Act (formerly known as the “Capital Homestead Act”)? I am not entirely sure I understand how this proposal would work, but it seems to involve the government providing some modest contribution to a new born's investment account at birth and the growth/dividends plus yearly additions end up providing a substantial capital base for each new citizen after 20 or more years, for education or retirement or ???. The government's initial capital input is reimbursed after some period and the remaining gains continue to grow.
Sounds like a "something for nothing" scheme and no requirement to demonstrate personal responsibility, but I may be misunderstanding the goal or the means involved.
My original capture of that explanation (in Word) is no longer an active link but these seem to cover the same basic idea, from my search at the Center for Economic and Social Justice web site: https://www.cesj.org/ .
Coalition for Capital Homesteading [2012] https://www.cesj.org/programs/coalition-for-capital-homesteading
Graphic Overview: Financing Green Growth with Capital Ownership Opportunities for Every Citizen [2019] https://www.cesj.org/just-third-way-feature/graphic-overview-financing-green-infrastructure-with-capital-homesteading-for-every-citizen
Capital Credit Insurance and Reinsurance [2015] https://www.cesj.org/learn/economic-democracy-act/capital-credit-insurance-reinsurance
Let's see, another thought: I suspect this is something that would wait until after the midterms, per your other posts on Trump's desired focus, etc. Use the intervening two years to examine and "solve" as many of the potential problem issues as we can ahead of actually passing and implementing the program. Plus it is also a program that the Dem's should still favor, whether they do or do not gain in the midterm election. They may just resist so the R's don't get the "credit" for the intiiative? Fools them, if they do that.
On the number and size of plots, I understand we are discussing "low income" housing, so some fraction of the program might even provide for partial credits in condos in lieu of plots. Still involves ownership and responsibilities to be productive citizens, etc. And stay away from the really large "projects" type buildings - maybe 3 stories high, 18 units total, or ??? Not a lifestyle I would prefer, but some folks would like the lower maintenance obligations, etc.
I also wonder about the net result from the granting of federal tax holiday periods [was that for the homesteaders and/or for the construction crews, etc.?]. The people needing and qualifying for this homestead award (not exactly a gift as it comes with associated responsibilities) are probably also in the lower socioeconomic range, but it seems if they are paying $166 (or slightly more?) per month and then getting the equivalent of that back in tax forgiveness, then it is a net gift? But hopefully not side stepping the aspects of responsibility and commitment this program is intended to provide and foster. Or perhaps your vision is of (mostly younger) people who have acquired some skills or training or education as part of their upward mobility, and are now ready to become homeowners and solid citizens, etc.?? They have or can get jobs as remote or local workers.
Would you have any restrictions on singles vs. cohabitating couples vs. married couples? With or without children?
Whether you or Trump have great minds, we will probably have to await the verdict of history to assess that, but we can grant that you both have very good minds, each with their respective pluses and minuses.
My initial thought was "what about water" and then you do assert they have plenty of underground acquifers. Other infrastructure and its distribution will still require close coordination with local and state authorities [although maybe they are used to a Big Gov presence in their face out in Nevada?].
As a fan of the architect Frank Lloyd Wright, I have reservations about a housing site as small as 5000 sq ft (50 x 100?). That is basically less than 1/8th acre. I lived on such a plot in Chicago and it was ok, but the yard was small and there was not much room for much of any outside enjoyment or activity. I am struggling to find room on a 1/2 acre lightly wooded parcel to put a house design I favor among the trees: if I go forward with this project, I will end up removing 6 rather nice trees to fit it in. Given the open spaces available in NV, I would suggest something closer to an acre per homestead, thus setting up township equivalents or "neighborhoods" of 600 or so plots and 1200+ people. This is also a large enough group to get and keep the attention of the politicians when required, at least if the citizens work together for common goals. As you mention, further land allowance for infrastructure, schools, police stations, etc. would also need to be provided, and that would also be granted "free" (?) to the locality? Would local officials also be required to construct the required facilities under similar agreements as for the homesteaders? [say 1 HS, 3 middle schools, 6 elementary schools, etc., to be built within 5 years to cover the needs of 3 to12(?) township neighborhoods? The existing non homesteading citizens are placed on the hook for those, although they may benefit from more people for other reasons.]
Opps: I forgot that a "towhship" was 6 miles square, or 36 sq miles, not a single sq mile. So maybe 30 to 34 neighborhoods per township, or 30 to 50 thousand people? A good sized town with the resources to provide most amenities people need or desire. Coupled to the larger major city nearby for those extra special needs, like sport standiums, etc. Build out one township while planning the next three townships, etc. per your trial and error approach.