my heart goes out to landowners without mineral rights
I am getting compensated for our minerals but it would be tough to deal with all of this and get nothing. These people need a voice and should get something for their troubles. Alaskans get a check every year for their energy as long as you lived there for awhile. I'm not saying this is the answer but something needs to be corrected. What's even worse is there value of there house and land will fall apart. Would you buy a house land without minerals in the middle of this.....NO WAY. They loss everything and get nothing in return. That needs to be fixed. I want to make a lot of money butnot at the expense of my neighbors.
Views: 6497
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Dexter Green on -
"Would you buy a house land without minerals in the middle of this"
Plenty of people did, which is why they don't own mineral rights. Caveat emptor.
-
Permalink Reply by jason irvine on
-
Dexter. I think they bought it before the changes. And.....guys. I'm a landowner I just felt bad for some of those people. And yes. I wouldn't have a problem if they took a tax to pay people for value loss. I don't want anyone to lose what they have worked a lifetime to achieve for something they have no control over. I want drilling. Iwwant everyone to drill monster wells. I want everyone to make a lot of money. But not at the expense of others. I obviously don't have the answers. I guess it was thecchance they took when they bought their property. I wish there was a way thatall could profit and be happy. WWishful thinking.
-
Permalink Reply by Dexter Green on
-
"I think they bought it before the changes. And.....guys. I'm a landowner I just felt bad for some of those people. And yes. I wouldn't have a problem if they took a tax to pay people for value loss. I don't want anyone to lose what they have worked a lifetime to achieve for something they have no control over."
Maybe we should start handing out piles of unmarked bills to the people of Detroit. After all, many of them moved there before the city committed seppuku and left a bloated corpse on the front lawn of the residents there. You need to get off this notion of fair and equitable outcomes for all. It's a fantasy. It's nice that you're sympathetic, but frankly if I was negotiating on the other side of you I'd take you for all you're worth. And probably a little more. Being emotional and sympathetic probably gets you into heaven but it's not what we base our societal rules off of.
-
Permalink Reply by Carl Krebsbach on
-
Jason,
You wish a tax were imposed to distribute wealth? You mean you want to use the force of government to rob people who have priorities for the wealth that are different than yours. Why do you think that it is better to rob Joe Landowner's wealth to give to your neighbor instead of Joe Landowner using it as he sees fit, which may include helping poor children born with birth defects? Your neighbor may just spend it on a new four-wheeler - nothing wrong with that, but how is that better than Joe Landowner donating to help people in need through no fault of their own, or paying for his kids' or grandkids' education?
The trouble with socialists is that they always think they know the best way to allocate wealth, which is the very HEIGHT of arrogance. Central planning does not work, has never worked, will never work, because no one person or small group of people is smart enough to know the best way to allocate wealth. And the worst part of it is that they are willing to use the force of government - armed thugs with guns come if you don't pay - to impose their will on others who see things differently. And that is nothing short of evil.What percent of YOUR OWN shale wealth are you going to give to your neighbors who, for one reason or another, did not buy gas and oil rights? That is what you should be concentrating on, not on forcing other people to do your will at the point of government guns.
-
Permalink Reply by James Foster on
-
Buyer beware ... it is the buyers job to do their homework on anything they buy. You buy a used car without having a warranty or a mechanic check it out ... well you get what you pay for. You buy property without mineral rights it should have been cheaper and you should know and understand that you do not have mineral rights.
Alaska as an example is a poor example. The state of Alaska itself owns 97.9 million acres. There are not many people living out in the wilds of Alaska. And the state also owns much of the mineral rights of the few surface landowners there. Few people in Alaska own the surface and mineral rights. Also in Hawaii people do not own the surface or mineral rights. They lease land to build a house. They own the house but not the land. They have 99 year lease. These are native populations who believe in socialism when it comes to the ownership of land. Just like on reservations here in the US. It is a totally different culture so it is not a good comparison at all.
-
Permalink Reply by jason irvine on
-
James. Thank you for not responding like big....just give them some of yours. You make great points and I agree Alaska is a bad example. I just couldn't think of another.
I'm not one of the people I am referring to. I just feel bad for them. There probably iisn't a answer. I am in a job were I play the middleman. If I can make both sides happy then I did good. I wish everyone would get rich off this. As long as I get the most. Lol
-
Permalink Reply by Greg on
-
I bought my property in Harrison county Ohio in 1993. Back then, a lot of properties did not come with mineral rights. I looked at quite a few parcels before buying the one we have and if I remember about half did not come with all rights. Harrisson county was coal country and the O/G wells were already everywhere. I was fortunate and got my rights with the property we chose. BUT... I very well might have bought it anyways.
-
Permalink Reply by jason irvine on
-
That is great. We don't think about these type of things when we are purchasing especially something that might not change for years. This is a real eye opener for future land purchased. If people don't learn from this then nothing will help them. I agree buyer beware.
-
-
Everyone, everwhere in the U.S. will benefit from the cheaper, more reliable energy and other products resulting from this recent oil and gas development.
-
Permalink Reply by jason irvine on
-
Good point. Don't take what I was saying the wrong way like several people did. I saw a lot of new metal roofs, garages, barns, trucks, and four wheelers. And I mean a lot. It obviously is great for a lot of people. But for the landowner who doesn't own the minerals and everything they know is changing around him and there is no compensation...I feel bad for that person. I empathize cause it would suck. But. That is the risk you take when you buy without minerals. There just has to be a way that some of these people could get some kind of inconvienence tax break or something like that. And what happens if the value of the property falls. That doesn't seem right.
-
Permalink Reply by Tree Farmer on
-
A rising tide lifts all ships. Maybe the fragmentation of large tracts of land will slow down, maybe. That creates a higher price for smaller parcels. A landowner without o/g rights can sell now by using higher prices for all, make the inflated cap gain and move, or not. Maybe they work at the roofing company, the 4 wheeler shop, the garage builder? Maybe they need a loan on increased land valuations that are available because of an increased economy and relaxed banking regs. Lower energy prices are the hub of the wheel that turns prosperity across the land. Yin and yang is a natural thing. The down trodden will always exist, but we have no perspective on what the true poor in this world look like, no clue. Our poor are kings in many parts of the world.
Top Content
Latest Activity
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
