you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 14 points 2 months ago* (2 children)

Isn’t Patagonia basically pristine and undeveloped because it is very remote and hard to develop. And from that highway documentary I remember also big parts are private property

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    big parts are private property

    Surely that makes them easier to buy and develop on than if they were publically owned? Or am I missing your point?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago

    Big sales are easier with consolidated ownership vs disaggregated ownership.

    If you need all 1000 acres to get from point a to point b to build something but requires 1000 different people to individually agree it may be next to impossible compared to needing 30 government officials to agree.

    There is a reason eminent domain is used so much in the US vs private transactions for large projects. The Dakota access pipeline for example could be done through private purchases, but it's basically so impossible that not approving forced government sales through eminent domain was consider "blocking" it.

  • source
  • parent