There are people in this country who are highly agitated about how overpopulated the US has become, and these folks suffer under a mysterious belief we are going to end up using all our resources within a few decades. No, it’s worse than that. They are actually convinced our overpopulation, combined with our wasteful ways, will lead to the total devastation, not just of this country, but to all humanity.

What nonsense.

The United States is anything but overcrowded. The big cities clearly are, but the truth is most of the United States is still unpopulated.There is enough land and renewable resources out there to provide food and shelter to the entire world, in perpetuity, without putting any of it in serious jeopardy. The only reason future generations might end up dying in droves is because government regulation is ruining what little we are using now.

Speaking as somebody who has driven
from one end of the lower 48 states to the other, in every possible combination
of directions, I can personally tell you there are vast expanses of open land
between the developed urban areas, especially in the western states, and there
is much more unused land out there nobody even knows about because it’s beyond
view of the highways. To really understand how much undeveloped land is out
there you should look out the window on long flights. If you did this as you
flew from New York to LA, you’d see a few signs of civilization along the way,
but you’d land with the impression there isn’t much population between the two
cities. It’s more than just an impression. It’s the truth.

Here’s some proof:

These are maps Verizon has used over the last few years to demonstrate how much
better their cell phone coverage is from other companies. The red areas show where their coverage was at the time, and the white areas show where there was no coverage. Know why there’s so much white? It’s because there’s no civilization in those areas! As you can see, the red areas have increased, and someday Verizon’s map might be totally red, but that isn’t because more people have started living in the
white areas; it’s because Verizon is working to make it possible for your phone
to work no matter where you happen to be. There is likely to come a day when
you could go hiking in the wilderness of Utah, or possibly survive a plane crash
in the middle of the Nevada desert, and your cell phone would still be able to
complete a call.

What’s useful about the top picture
is it gives you a good idea where the great majority of people really live. You
could move all the red areas into one big blob, and it wouldn’t take up 25% of
the country. Keep in mind we’re only talking about the area used for cell phone
coverage. If you moved all the actual people, and kept them in average suburb
conditions, it wouldn’t even fill up Texas. Does that sound like overcrowding
to you?

The second picture gives you a sense
of how open the western states still are. Even in 2013 most cell phone coverage
out west was around the main highways. This isn’t simply because the roads are built
where the people live; it’s mostly because large numbers of people travel these
roads, and they expect their phones to even work in the wide, open areas
between the cities.

Take note of Alaska. It appears
Verizon isn’t available there, and yet they still claim 96% of Americans are
covered. Does this mean the missing 4% are all in Alaska, and, if so, how would
it be possible for the lower 48 to be overcrowded when at least a third of it doesn’t
need cell phone coverage?

Some of the unpopulated areas are
farm or ranch land, and a small chunk (statistics say 3%) is reservation land,
but most of it belongs to the government. Check this out.

This isn’t a Verizon map. This is a government map. In this case the red areas are now
used to show how much land the government claims. As you can see, the
government owns most of the western states. They actually call it "Public"
land, but the public isn’t even allowed to enter a good deal of it. There are
large areas where you will be arrested if you are caught inside them, and I
don’t just mean ‘Area 51’. Now, I’m not one who is inclined to believe the
stories of Egyptian mummies and other fantastic artifacts being hidden out
there, but I would like to know if there is a good reason why humans shouldn’t
be allowed to hike onto land not being used.

Assuming the government isn’t using
this land to build secret concentration camps for conservatives, or to hide displaced
space aliens from the Rubbirduhk Prefecture, it seems to me, if our noble
politicians in Washington really cared about the well-being of our country, they
could use some of this land to improve the lives of many of our downtrodden
souls.

In fact, there are three big issues I think even
leftists would agree could be addressed with this territory.

First, there is a moral wrong our
politicians should feel obligated to correct. It was one thing when land in the past was
taken from the Indians under the guise of making better use of it
than the various tribes were able to manage, but just taking it for the sake of
keeping it away from private ownership is another thing altogether. It violates
every excuse our government ever used to justify pushing the Indians off the
land in the first place. Come on! There is no amount of corporate greed out
there even close to being as ‘evil’ as a government holding such a huge amount
of land it never intends to use.

For my part, I say the government should give at least half back to the Indians, and, when they do, they should let the Tribes decide which areas they get! Oh, and I don’t just mean declare it as additional Reservation land. I mean give them full ownership so they can do with it as they please. Did you
know Indians aren’t even allowed to sell the houses they live in on reservation
land because the government didn’t give them full property rights? How on earth
can they ever improve their lot in life when they are given so little power to
govern their own affairs?

The only reason Indian life is still
so bleak today is because that’s the way the fine folks in Washington DC are
keeping it. Tax dollars galore are being spent, and several agencies are being
kept employed, but nothing of value is actually being done.

This is what you ultimately get when
the government has complete control of your life, and this is one major
difference between conservatives and leftists. Republican politicians have been
trying for years to give the Indians complete control of their lands, and
Democrats have been fighting to keep the Indians living under welfare
conditions. In fact, whenever Democrats claim they are fighting for Indian
rights, they never do anything more substantial than advocate for changing the
names of sport teams. Well, whoop-de-damn-doo!

The worst part is the people doing all the crying over how badly the Indians were treated in the past are the same ones making sure they stay a mistreated people. Lord knows it would be a terrible thing to actually solve a problem and then have to shut down some useless government jobs afterwards. Hell,
if leftists ever manage to get total control, the entire country will end up being run like a reservation.

The second thing the government could do with this land is open up usable parts to homesteading again, and I don’t mean under the modern day laws. I mean give the homesteaders the land
without all the taxes, special fees, and other restrictions the government has deliberately imposed. They only did those things to ensure the land would remain too expensive or complicated to homestead, and here’s something else the bureaucrats don’t want you to know. There’s more than enough good land out there to clear out all our slums and to solve our illegal immigrant problem.

Yeah, that’s right. I said illegal immigration. We are constantly being told these people only come here to do jobs Americans won’t do, so why not let them do it on land they could someday own? (I realize this offer should only apply to people who haven’t already been caught entering the country illegally, but there’s nothing preventing us from pretending we don’t even notice it when the ones who never got caught are wise enough to go back home to apply properly). If they follow the rules, and if they actually make their farms work, what have we got to lose? Anything we could do to make up for all the farms the politicians in California are destroying would only be to the country’s benefit.

On the other hand, the slum situation wouldn’t be as easy to fix. Well, it could be… if we could find
enough people willing to accept the offer
. I rather doubt we could, though. We could
even spend a trillion dollars, which is much less than we have already spent
fighting the war on poverty, and is not something I advocate we should do, but I
suspect the folks conditioned with New York values would actually stage mass
demonstrations against the mere proposal.

Think about it. The land would be free, but with a trillion dollars we could offer to teach folks how to raise
crops, chickens and/or cows. We could then give them the seeds and the animals.
We could also give them a two year supply of food, a tractor, a truck, and pay
for wells to be dug on the land. We could even provide houses with solar panels,
and do anything else you can think of to help them become self-sufficient, but it wouldn’t be enough. Most folks would still turn the offer down. If history has done nothing else, it has already proven when people are given the choice to own land they must farm themselves, or simply exist with very little in a slum, they will usually accept the slum. The majority of people are just naturally prone to feel safer staying
with what they know instead of making a big leap into the unknown. (By the way, there’s nothing set in stone saying the land only needs to be used for farming or ranching. There are a wide variety of ways people could make use of land today that weren’t available in the 1800’s).

Oh well, it’s a free country (so far), and we can’t force people to take such a risk. However, there is another group of people we might have an easier time convincing to accept a similar
offer, and this brings up the third thing the government could do with some of
the open land – Alleviate prison over-crowding.

Suppose you were convicted of a nonviolent
crime, and your sentence was for five or more years. If the government offered
to let you serve your time, or even a reduced sentence, working on farm or ranchland
away from civilization, under supervision, wouldn’t you think that might be a better
option than spending those years in one of our horrible prisons? I know I
would.

What could be the possible harm? Farm
or ranch work is healthy, and the food produced would only be to the good. The
government could either sell it or give it to the poor. Even if it was only
raised to feed all the prisoners in the country, it would still reduce the
costs of imprisonment.

Aw, I know it’s just a dream. There’s
no way we could ever get career politicians to go along with any of this. Even so, I
wish they would at least consider one of these options. As far as I’m
concerned, if the government isn’t using the land for anything, they have no
business keeping it.

Here are my final thoughts on the matter. I have great admiration for the Indian cultures, and I totally sympathize with their plight, so I’d be perfectly happy to see all this land returned to the Indians. If the leftist politicians were serious about ‘saving’ the earth, and if they truly believed the Indians were better stewards of the planet than "The White Man" ever was, then they’d start pushing harder to put the unused land back under Indian control.

Ha! That’ll be the day.

PS: Life to America!

0 0 votes
Article Rating