Wazua
»
Investor
»
Property
»
Home owners stare at Sh16bn losses
Rank: Veteran Joined: 1/4/2010 Posts: 1,668 Location: nairobi
|
@alma, check out the below words by sociologist Henry George, as he advocated for land reforms in New york in the 1890s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_and_Poverty
Quote:The following excerpt represents the crux of George's argument and view of political economy.[1]
"Take now... some hard-headed business man, who has no theories, but knows how to make money. Say to him: "Here is a little village; in ten years it will be a great city-in ten years the railroad will have taken the place of the stage coach, the electric light of the candle; it will abound with all the machinery and improvements that so enormously multiply the effective power of labor. Will in ten years, interest be any higher?" He will tell you, "No!" Will the wages of the common labor be any higher...?" He will tell you, "No the wages of common labor will not be any higher..." "What, then, will be higher?" "Rent, the value of land. Go, get yourself a piece of ground, and hold possession." And if, under such circumstances, you take his advice, you need do nothing more. You may sit down and smoke your pipe; you may lie around like the lazzaroni of Naples or the leperos of Mexico; you may go up in a balloon or down a hole in the ground; and without doing one stroke of work, without adding one iota of wealth to the community, in ten years you will be rich! In the new city you may have a luxurious mansion, but among its public buildings will be an almshouse."
An often cited passage from Progress and Poverty is The Unbound Savannah in which George discusses how the building of a community increases the value of land.[2] Check out the part in red. This is what happens in Kenya. Govt hoards so much land, creating unnecessary high demand, hence kenyans become desperate. This desperation by kenyans for land is then transformed into super high profits by land onwers. The more govt releases its land for private development, the less the demand for housing and the lower the prices for housing. As Iron Sharpens Iron, So one Man Sharpens Another.
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 1/4/2010 Posts: 1,668 Location: nairobi
|
@alma, check these words by another New york sociologist, Archbishop Corrigan, in the 1890s when New york was a slum http://schalkenbach.org/...volume-1-april-23-1887/
the increase in land values continues at an accelerated pace, and it will be vastly greater during the coming century than it has been during the past. two hundred years. The question is, shall this generation go on repeating the blunder of the past, or will it, even at this late day, secure to the people the values that their mere presence on this island creates. This is the issue of present politics that dwarfs all others into insignificance, and no one who comprehends all that such a change assures can have any hesitation in giving his best energies to assist in bringing it about. Happily the workingmen, whose wits have never been befogged by a false system of political economy, who have personally experienced the abomination of overcrowding, while they see thousands of acres lying unused and vacant within the city limits, have found and declared the truth; but the reform that they purpose will not benefit only those technically called workingmen. Every renter in this city has an equal interest in bringing about a change that will multiply homes, cheapen the rent of dwellings, promote building and other industries, and which, though it may not lower the ground rents of business places, will divert those rents from private pockets to the municipal treasury to be used in works of public utility for the common benefit. Let the retail storekeepers, especially, think what it would mean to them to have established a system that would set an army of men to work in building up the waste places of New York, and thus give an impulse to every trade in the city. As Iron Sharpens Iron, So one Man Sharpens Another.
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 7/22/2011 Posts: 1,325
|
a4architect.com wrote:@nabwire, true. Most African countries have the same land laws like kenya and land prices rise as astronomical. Only north africa and south africa have utilised land laws similar to usa , northern europe and china and the difference in the economy is very clear.
If sociologists like Henry George advocated for the royal family and catholic church land to be redistributed to the poor, the result would have been anarchy and poor land utilisation. Instead, they chose to look at the bigger picture, ignore the issue of who owns the land and how, is the ownership legal or not etc etc. They chose to concentrate on the fact that whoever currently owns the land can continue owning it as long as the land will be beneficial to the rest of the population eg by farming on it, building rental houses etc etc. This way, the emotive issue of who owns the land becomes irrelevant eg whether commissioner of lands owned the land, sold it to kamau, otieno etc becomes irrelevant as song as kamau,otieno etc are utilising the land for usage to the rest of the population.
The whole world over, land will almost certainly be owned by the ruling class and any attempt to rechange this is impossible. The easiest way out is to force the same land owners to utilise the land in a win win situation. This is very true, but the problem is as long as the people don't trust the government, as long as there is corruption( how sure is the investor that the idle land tax money is not going into someone's pockets?), as long as institutions that are supposed to protect the investors are not adequate, then not much will change, there will be no benefit to the average citizen, and land prices will continue to escalate.
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 1/4/2010 Posts: 1,668 Location: nairobi
|
@nabwire, the beauty about land laws is that there is no need to reinvent the wheel. All kenya has to do is borrow from the best eg new york. If laws are enforced such that no land owner, whether an individual, govt, or corporate, should be allowed to hold land idle without utilising it, this will be a straight forward check measure to ensure the whole economy benefits since all will see the utilisation eg farming, rental houses, school etc. Even if the tax acrued from this is stolen through corruption, other benefits to theeconomy eg more food production hence lwer food prices, more rentl houses hence lower rents etc will benefit the economy. See below logic Quote:EXPLAINING THE PARADOX
Henry George's analysis was deceptively simple. He observed that the world is deeply divided between
property owners and the people who work for them. It was obvious that the former group had more money
or capital than the latter. But why? Henry George reasoned that the hidden factor lying behind wealth
differences is concentrated ownership of land and natural resources. As long as a few people or
corporations own most of the natural resources and real estate, the rest of society has to pay for the right to
work and survive. If everyone had access to their share of the earth’s wealth, they could support
themselves in some fashion. But as long as raw materials and good locations are monopolized by a few
people or corporations, this path out of poverty is cut off.
Today, most economists believe economic growth is the solution to poverty. If an economy grows,
supposedly everyone will benefit. This idea is sometimes disparaged as “trickle down economics,” because
the benefits of growth are supposed to trickle down from the rich to the poor. But Henry George showed
why it did not work. He pointed out that most of the benefits of economic growth go to the people who own
land and resources. Rising incomes cause the price of land and resources to rise, because they are in fixed
supply. So, economic growth causes resource owners to "grow rich in their sleep" as John Stuart Mill once
put it. The people who do not own land and resources grow relatively poorer, since they now pay more for
the same quantity. That is why progress causes poverty.
This idea is quite different from the socialist belief that private ownership of capital causes the exploitation of
workers. Socialists propose to equalize wages by seizing all productive property from owners and having
the state manage it in the form of worker co-operatives. Socialism changes the structure of ownership, but
it also removes the incentive for work, politicizes investment decisions, and has historically produced a
static and wasteful economy.
Henry George also differed from the cheerful belief of capitalist economists that a free-market system
automatically benefits everyone. As long as the benefit of owning land and natural resources is privatized,
grotesque inequality would continually emerge and destroy the societies that did nothing to stop it. http://www.catholicchari...w_remedy_for_poverty.pdfAs Iron Sharpens Iron, So one Man Sharpens Another.
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 1/4/2010 Posts: 1,668 Location: nairobi
|
These below, are the largest land owners in new york. Catholic church and Govt. As long as the catholic church and govt in new york continue to utilise their land well, either in frming, industry, schools, rental apartments etc, new york's economy will thrive. To get to this level, sociologists 100 years ago realised its a futile attempt to try and remove land ownership from the catholic church to the people. It was easier to ensure that they still own the land but contribute to the economy by utilising theland, hence win win. In kenya, we are still at the stage where we have not linked the elite land owners eg Kenyatta, Moi, catholic church, govt who hold large idle lands with the poverty/high rents/high food prices in nairobi. Once we stop concentrating on these land owners, and concentrate on implementing land laws prohibiting idle land holding, we will surely move towards develpment like new york. 100 years ago, new york was a slum as these held alot of idle land. Now, newyork is thriving. Quote:The table below represents a partial list of the private owners of vacant residential lots in the city, ranked by assessed lot value. Manhattan parcels were not included, since they are already subjected to the higher tax rates Mr. de Blasio wants to apply to properties throughout the rest of the city. Some of the largest owners are nonprofits like the Roman Catholic Church, and governments, most notably the state of New York. We have, for the most part, focused on private ownership and thus tried to exclude government properties from the database below. Some municipal properties are included due to the city's data tabulation.
Search the database, download the data and leave your observations and feedback in the comments tab of this article. http://www.crainsnewyork...st-valuable-vacant-lots
See the largest land owners in britain here. The royal family and govt. British citizens accepted this fact and moved on as long as the land owners used their lands well for farming, real estate etc. http://www.countrylife.c...-Top-UK-landowners.html
[quote]he top ten UK landowners have been revealed 1. The Forestry Commission 2,571,270 acres Owned by the Government-which wants to privatise it-on behalf of the public, Britain's largest land manager leases 208,895 acres of the 2.5 million acres in its care. Created in 1919, the Forestry Com-mission looks after 1.4 billion trees and has helped to expand Britain's woodlands by an area more than three times the size of Greater London in the past 20 years. 2. The National Trust 630,000 acres With more than 350 historic houses, gardens and monuments in its care, as well as tracts of coastal, farm- and moorland, the Trust remains one of our most important national institutions. Indeed, 14 million people visit its ‘pay for entry' properties every year. 3. Defence Estates, for the Ministry of Defence 592,800 acres More than two-thirds of Defence Estates' land is considered to be ‘rural estate' and is held solely for the purpose of training the armed forces. Encompassing 3,600 sites, the land-which makes up 1% of the UK's land mass-includes 171 Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), 700 scheduled archaeological monuments, 50,000 service homes and more than 800 listed buildings. It also has more than 700 rural tenants and licensees. 4. The Pension Funds 550,000 acres Many of the UK's 2,800-plus major pension funds have invested in land for hundreds of years, attracted, no doubt, by a possible rental income of more than 7% per annum. 5. Utilities: water,electricity, railways 500,000 acres Although it has proved impossible to break down the exact acreage of land owned by the UK's 18 energy, 22 water and 32 rail companies, we estimate the total acreage (think of huge power stations such as Didcot, reservoirs such as Bewl Water and water-treatment works such as the new Thames Barrage site) comes to about half a million acres. 6. The Crown Estate 358,000 acres There is no other organisation in the world quite like The Crown Estate. With a portfolio worth more than £6.6 billion, it encompasses a wide variety of land, from beef farms in the north of Scotland to offices in the West End of London, from Portland stone mining in Dorset to forests in the West Country, as well as much of the UK's coastline and some of the sea bed. It also boasts significant holdings in London's Regent Street, Regent's Park and St James's, as well as agricultural estates of 265,000 acres (made up of 780 tenancies), including the 15,600-acre Windsor estate. Although the rural land holding estate amounts to 358,000 acres, if the acreage of the sea bed, foreshore and urban estate were factored in, the land-ownership figures could stretch to millions of acres. The Crown Estate ‘belongs' to the reigning monarch, but it is not the private property of The Queen or the Government. It is independently managed, and its surplus is revenue that is paid to the Treasury. The monarch receives a fixed annual payment in return, which we call the Civil List. 7. The RSPB 321,237 acres The RSPB is not only mighty in terms of its one million-plus membership, its 200 nature reserves cover about 321,237 acres of UK land. Founded by volunteers 121 years ago, the organisation-which is now one of the UK's richest charities-is continuing to grow at a rapid rate of knots. Last year, The Scotsman reported that RSPB Scotland's landholding had increased to 124,000 acres from 87,000 acres in 2000, making it the eighth biggest landowner in Scotland. 8. The Duke of Buccleuch & Queensberry 240,000 acres Queensberry and Langholm estates in Dumfriesshire, Bowhill in Selkirk-shire, Boughton in Northamptonshire and Dalkeigh Palace, on the outskirts of Edinburgh. 9. The National Trust for Scotland 192,000 acres The National Trust for Scotland has, in the past, acquired large areas of land that are bequeathed to it. However, due to recently exposed financial difficulties, it is expected to limit the amount of land it takes on in the future. 10. The Duke of Atholl's trusts 145,700 acres The Atholl estate in Perthshire. Read more at http://www.countrylife.c...tml#57uklmCeAcVOJoAK.99[/quote] As Iron Sharpens Iron, So one Man Sharpens Another.
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 4/20/2012 Posts: 888
|
a4architect.com wrote:Jamani wrote:a4architect.com wrote:Jamani wrote:jamplu wrote:Jamani wrote:a4architect.com wrote:the same should have applied to syokimau. The airport should have been relocated to konza. a4a.com, I can't believe its you making that comment, without even putting logic compare the two costs the demolished units in syokimau and JKIA relocating @Jamani someday you will hear of KAA and the govt complaining that there are unsuitable buildings near greenfield and the proposed second runway there are several storied buildings near KAA's land JKIA resort mall, mitchell cotts and offices on tile & carpet airport view warehouses they are watching them being constructed they've even gone ahead and given approval for the construction. I appreciate your comment, however there is some difference the tile & carpet, Mitchell cotts are built on their own plots, they have not encroached on the JKIA land hence they will be compensated should their land be required. Syokimau people encroached and that's the reason their buildings were brought down without compensation, the issue wasn't suitablity or otherwise it was encroachment. @jamani, sometimes i am worried by mentality of the majority of Kenyans to act like lynch mobs to other people who seem to have made a few strides in investments. From the judiciary to ordinary kenyans, the chorus is demolish, demolish as we saw with JKIA situation. Could it be an issue of lack of understanding the advantates or is it just sheer jealousy? When i look at the kevivapi land, i see hard working kenyans trying to house their families and provide housing/shelter to other kenyans. Whether the land was grabbed or not, kevivapi land use should have been revoked years ago and the land offered to the public to be constructed on as residential or office space. As a country, the economy, all 40 million kenyans, including you @jamani, would loose out if kevivapi were to carry out agric activities on the land. All 40 million kenyans, including you @jamani, are benefiting when the kevivapi land is being used as residential currently. The net effect in the economy is positive, job creations, less travel time for workers ,etc etc. Assuming kevivapi continues to utilise the land, the house owners would have moved further, pushing the urban sprawl as nairobi expands. This would have costed you @jamani, myself nd the rest of the 40 million kenyans, around kes 2 billion to lay the infrastructure/roads/water/sewer etc.This would have been unnecessary/wasted/duplicated since the infrastructure is there at kevivapi land but not utilised appropriately in the kevivapi agricultural use. For once, lets begin to look at the bigger picture of things as a nation, not as individuals. The big picture we should be looking at is not encroachment and grabbing then crying foul when the law is followed. The big picture we should be advocating is to do the right thing first, to save us the 2 billion plus by changing the land use and utilizing the land as you have mentioned transparently. @a4a.com what you saying is so long as one can justify better use of your land it's okay for them to take it. That's anarchy @jamani, replace the words one with government in your sentence above. As long as Government can justify the land use of your land to be the most desirable, they can take it. Its called the compulsory land acquisitions act. http://kenyalaw.org/kl/f...ndAcquisitionCap295.pdf
Thats why we elect governments so as to make such decisions. NSSF is Government so the developer bought from Government. @a4architect.com Your argument will set a precedent with serious implications. Taking possession of Government land should never be allowed. However, the Government needs to put its house in order to ensure its land is well safeguarded. The second and third purchasers should have a recourse in Law.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 10/9/2008 Posts: 5,389
|
|
|
|
Rank: New-farer Joined: 4/19/2014 Posts: 25
|
To be very honest, Alma and Jus Blazin have been right all along. That a4 is changing tact everytime he's caught is worrying. When you mention illegal, he says he doesnt know coz he's not a lawyer. When you call investors (because indeed they are), he says that is "disrespectful". It may b, but it's the truth.
For as long as the owner says I never sold this land, then the occupiers should sue for compensation immediately. Sonko cannot be "saving" people. Worse still are the several links that have to do with land use and planning. That is all conjecture.
KAMA ULIPATA NYUMA YA SHERIA, EVERY OTHER REASON AS TO WHY YOU OWN, OWNED, OR ARE OWNING THAT LAND IS NULL AND VOID. GET OUT JUU SI YAKO.
Everything else is a sideshow. Land use, mzungu, moving jkia, denver sijui what is absolutely irrelevant. Worse still, a professional who defends an illegal acquisiton and use of land is the reason Kenya is where it is today.
The attitude that "it's not my responsibility to help him search".... Kenya!
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 1/4/2010 Posts: 1,668 Location: nairobi
|
@657300, what exactly is your point? The reason kenya and Africa is behind is because we have refused to use research and think outside the box to resolve our problems. Its not a matter of who is right or wrong. Its a matter of which argument goes a long way to solve the Kenya economic situation for a majority of Kenyans who need solutions.The reason why i put my points forward is to see if they will help the average Kenyan into home ownership. I personally own my home and would like a majority of kenyans to join me in home ownership. Its up to people to use their judgement to decide which arguments are going to help their home ownership quests. I am only doing my part of benevolent civic duty/ free contribution to see if this will help . You dont have to take/follow everything i say. You can also give your ideas then we see if they will help since no man is a monopoly of good ideas. In another post, you inquired for advice on building an apartment at oltepesi. i have given you answers that will save you from a very poor investment decision. I will not put a gun on your head for you to follow my advisory since its up to you to do what you wish. @jaggernaut, its the other way round. The star found my argument interesting and they put it forward in their newspaper. I write for fun/hobby on my website and the star is free to take any article from my website and publish it in their paper. @mkwasi,the mistake i did was to put forward a very technical argument . This has led to mis understanding. I always argue the same points with practising valuers, conveyancing lawyers, etc, technical people, whereby we agree with each other since they can be able to see deeper than an advocacy to grabbing land. Deeper research as to the relationship between fiscal economy and land laws at an international level is needed to get the general understanding on this argument. In USA, such arguments were not received well till mid 1900s. In scotland, such arguments were entertained/discussed in their parliament in 2012. http://www.parliament.uk...nd%20Reform%20Paper.pdf
Quote:11.1. Policies designed to encourage and facilitate the transfer/sale to communities of land
and other assets in the ownership of government, its agencies and local authorities
have been taking shape at both a Scottish and UK level for some time. One of the
earliest such measures, the Transfer of Crofting Estates (Scotland) Act 1997, makes
possible (as indicated earlier) community ownership of croft land presently owned by
Government. The Forestry Commission Scotland (FCS) National Forest Land Scheme
(NFLS), dating from 2005, is similarly intended to enable communities to take charge of
state-owned land, and has led to a number of such transfers – some of them involving
substantial areas. Further such moves, this time with an urban as well as rural focus, are
integral to the thinking behind the Community Empowerment and Renewal Bill (CERB)
now in development by the Scottish Government.
We propose a Community Empowerment and Renewal Bill, which will make it easier for
communities to take over underused or unused public sector assets, and include measures to
enable communities to deal more effectively with derelict or unused property in their area. This
will act as a catalyst for a wide range of community activities and enterprises.
SNP Scottish Parliamentary Election Manifesto, 2011.
The National Forest Land Scheme gives community organisations, recognised non-governmental
organisations (NGOs), and/or appropriate housing bodies the opportunity to buy or lease
National Forest Land where they can provide increased public benefits.
FCS website.
In its initial design, the NFLS adopted many criteria from the community right to buy provisions
contained in Part 2 of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003. However, applications are assessed
by an independent evaluation panel, which makes recommendations to the Director of FCS.
Following Director approval, applicants have 18 months to complete the sale (or lease), rather
than the six months given under the community right to buy legislation. In addition, the
discretionary nature of the scheme has allowed for its considerable evolution. In Africa, this will take at least 10 to 20 years for such arguments to be understood if kenyans refuse to research,rethink and relook how matters of land laws can be improved by simply copying land laws in more developed countries. Instead of reinventing the wheel, Kenya can also borrow from developed countries on how to deal with public land as in the Scotland case above, and reform land laws to allow govt land to change ownership to individuals without the lynch mob mentality coming in. As Iron Sharpens Iron, So one Man Sharpens Another.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 10/9/2008 Posts: 5,389
|
|
|
|
Wazua
»
Investor
»
Property
»
Home owners stare at Sh16bn losses
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
|