Still falls back to a natural resource does not equal a manufactured one. You haven't shown how rainwater is the equivalent to a home *someone built*!

because the someone who built it has long since deserted it and left it to rot, or was forcefully evicted by the banks (maybe because the tenent was living outside their means, maybe becvause they were taken advantage of by predetory loans, bundled cdo's or any of the hundreds of crooked banking practices) thus leaving it in the hands of someone who WILL NEVER USE IT EVER.

what it comes down to is what you see the fundamental purpose of a house as being.
You seem to think that a house is basically an investment, to be bought sold traded owned by people who will most likely never set foot in it.

I am of the opinion that a house is basically a structure for people ot live in.

I'm not trying to have a philisophical conversation, my point is that there are millions of homeless people, and millions of people-less homes. I think thats immoral but regardless of my morality, thats stupid. plain, black and white, unadulterated, visible with common sense, stupidity.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/29/opinion/what-the-costumes-reveal.html?_r=1&src=tp
^ see what I mean?

Just look at it as a problem that needs to be solved, somehow you need to put 2 and 2 together. No one who has the authority to do so, currently is doing so, let alone framing the situation in that manner, which I think is essential if something is to be done about it.
I could tell you about the injustice of it but I dont see you being very receptive of that. So I will just say that the two simultaneously existing represents an abject failure of the current 'systems' ability to function.

A tent is a structure for people to live in. A cave is one too. A house is an investment.

A cave not on private property?

Whats the difference between a tent and a house?

You really haven't heard of Mammoth Cave or Old Man's Cave? Both are in a public forest on public land. Only an idiot would think a cave can only ne on.private property, bit then of is Sic we are talking about.

And the difference between a house and a tent is so fucking obvious. One is temporary and can readily be moved. The other not so much.

If there were a free market in caves, they would appreciate even more than houses would and be excellent investments. Caves don't get built very often, and the forces behind cave production don't care about the strength of cave demand. But house construction will always trend according to house demand, limiting prices (assuming no inflationary pressures related to loose monetary policy).

"So the best video you can come up with proving the police are out to get us is a video from 2007 filmed in Quebec...well I'm convinced now."

Is this topical enough?

http://www.copblock.org/9777/cop-provocateurs-compromised-at-occupy-oakland/

Oh they are public are they? Wow cool, I should go move in right now. Thats fine right? I can go live there? there will be NO issues that arise from me using the cave as a shelter or home?

In the case of Old Man's Cave in Hocking Hills OH, there was a man who lived there for many years. So smartass, want to try again?

Fees are charged for cave tours, camping, and selected picnic shelter reservations, and are listed in the tables below.

http://www.nps.gov/maca/planyourvisit/feesandreservations.htm

Gee I guess mammoth isnt one of those caves I can just move into. If its a viable alternative to the millions of vacant un-used houses, can you give me some sort of list of available caves? Old mans cave sounds great but it seems someone is already living there.

There appears to be some millions of people in america without shelter, so I would really appreciate this list of millions of free available caves so we can get them 'housed.'

OMG!!!

it seems some time ago someone came up with a sort of fake cave. It's a shelter that offers almost as protection as a cave, but it can be placed anywhere you want because its not formed by millions of years of limestone erosion. And I just found this list of over 8000 caves that are COMPLETELY UNUSED, and thats just in one small area!

http://realestate.yahoo.com/search/Michigan/Detroit/foreclosures

Draug,
you see nothing wrong with the fact that the two simotaneously exist?

No, I see nothing wrong with it. Manufactured goods are owned. Possession of these goods in the eyes of the law trumps someone else's desires to *steal* them. Using something manufactured that isn't yours is *stealing*. *Thou shall not STEAL!*

So we have untold numbers of unused abandoned residences, and untold numbers of people who have no shelter, and this is because 'its just the way it is'?
You dont think this says something about our society? at all? even just that its inefficient?

The so-called "manufactured" house is sitting on land that is part of the commons. The only reason it isn't part of the commons is because some authority stepped in to seize it and distribute it to private owners, giving these private owners legal "rights" backed by the guns of the state. That, my friend, is the real theft. Furthermore the land the resources used to build the house was also seized from the commons, with the backing of authority.

So really Draugnar is flipping the act of theft on its head, and calling the thieves the victims and the victims the thieves.

dont confuse him now

@Putin - where do you live? Do you pay rent/mortgage payments? If not, does *someone* claim your house/aprtment/dorm as their own? Then you are supporting that theft.

Kindof thin there draug

Oakland is inspiring. Shut down the port! Shut down Chase bank.

Yeah I live in a capitalist society. I support theft all the time by merely existing.