139 farms targeted for expropriation without compensation

konfab said:
Is it fear mongering when you report the truth?

The farm that the government has recently targeted is number 2 on Afriforum's list.
https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/state-takes-first-farm-20180818

That is more than just a coincidence. The evidence is ranking in that they were correct.
Click to expand...
Could it be that Afriforum knew of the claims regarding these two farms, that date back to 2011, and purposefully placed these two farms on the list, to drum up some positive spin for its cause?
 
buka001 said:
Could it be that Afriforum knew of the claims regarding these two farms, that date back to 2011, and purposefully placed these two farms on the list, to drum up some positive spin for its cause?
Click to expand...

To 1996 actually (claim filed) and 2006 (claim published in the Gazette).
 
konfab said:
You know, other than the fact that the ANC are following communist doctrine to the letter. Them changing the constitution now makes it easier for them to do their ultimate goal. Boiling the frog slowly as the saying goes.

Ask yourself the question, given the ANC that we all know and love, do you really think they would put a limitation on what they can do in the future? They have not been above anything else. Why this?
Click to expand...
I don't believe it! Not because I don't think they are willing and capable it's because it's not a good strategy if they want to retrain the majority vote.
 
f2wohf said:
Anyway, a court will rules. That's the expropriation in every democracy, nothing wrong with it.

The Valuer General is probably too low, the owners probably too high and it will come somewhere in the middle.
Click to expand...

The Valuation done in 2015 was by one of the top farm valuers in the country. He wrote the book on it. Literally - my wife has a copy in her office. If he estimated the value at R20.75 Million - its R20.75 Million.
 
Mila said:
https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/state-takes-first-farm-20180818

Sounds like the claim that it’s about minerals in the end is not so far off

This is just repeating history you would think history taught them something.
Click to expand...
2aa398e93fb6c8ab355dc902a6daad26.jpg
 
f2wohf said:
Anyway, a court will rules. That's the expropriation in every democracy, nothing wrong with it.

The Valuer General is probably too low, the owners probably too high and it will come somewhere in the middle.
Click to expand...
Lets hope that is the case.
 
The biggest lie told so far, of course, is the one by the ANC that land is the most pressing social issue in the country at the moment, when the party's own internal research shows it doesn't even feature in the top five.

The objective truth is: land is not the most pressing social issue in the country, according to every credible piece of research done on the topic. The triple-timebomb of poverty-unemployment-inequality, and crime and corruption are the five things that keep most South Africans – ANC voters included – awake at night.

Another uncomfortable truth is that the ANC has failed dismally in transforming the agricultural sector with the billions of rands and legal tools it had available since 1994. But those facts don't suit a populist narrative about "giving back the land".

https://m.news24.com/Columnists/Adr...t-loser-in-land-expropriation-debate-20180820
 
Who will protect you when the ANC comes for the land?
I believe in economic redress, but have been persuaded by circumstances to believe that the ANC government should not drive the land expropriation programme. The ANC, if possible, should never be allowed anywhere near the country’s land.

This feeling is based on a lived experience, and I’m convinced that black people, who are expected to benefit from the expropriation, will be in trouble if the ANC were ever given the extra powers to do whatever it pleases with land. Of course, the ANC is just a political party, so it should not be feared. Political parties are not indispensable.

What is scary is when constitutional institutions, like the office of the Public Protector, choose to turn a blind eye on matters brought to their attention for action.


Click to expand...


https://www.news24.com/Columnists/G...ou-when-the-anc-comes-for-the-land-20180819-2
 
A refurbishment of one of South Africa’s top-rated luxury game reserve lodges is now complete, and is again welcoming guests – offering exclusive use of its top-tiered facilities for R100,000 per night.

The Ulusaba Private Game Reserve is Sir Richard Branson’s (of Virgin fame) private game reserve in South Africa, which sits within the Sabi Sand Game Reserve near Kruger National Park, surrounded by 13,500 hectares of open bush.
Click to expand...
https://businesstech.co.za/news/lif...-africas-r100000-per-night-luxury-game-lodge/
I wonder if the comrades have their greedy eyes on this property.
 
f2wohf said:
And another one who can't read.

1. The matter is in court.
2. From the department:



https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/state-takes-first-farm-20180818

This is how any expropriation works.

You'd note that in 2011, the valuation provided by the owners was R50M, they increased it at R200M due to the possibility of developing an eco estate, which seems like complete BS.
Click to expand...

Complete BS? You have some very odd ideas. The owner of the land is operating in a free market in which he/she has full rights to do whatever he/she wants with it. They can burn it to the ground if they want. The land is linked to the business. They are therefore selling the business, so it's not complete BS. In addition to that, THERE IS NOT PROOF OF ANY CLAIM TO THE LAND. Do you support random farms being taken away if no one can prove that someone was actually dispossessed of it? They received a letter to advise them of inspection of the assets as well. So, it seems the government want the assets and/or infrastructure on the land in addition to the land.

There are so many things wrong with this case, it makes me sick to my stomach. This farmer should set up a fund for its legal costs. I will personally donate a ton of money to this issue.
 
Emjay said:
Complete BS? You have some very odd ideas. The owner of the land is operating in a free market in which he/she has full rights to do whatever he/she wants with it. They can burn it to the ground if they want. The land is linked to the business. They are therefore selling the business, so it's not complete BS. In addition to that, THERE IS NOT PROOF OF ANY CLAIM TO THE LAND. Do you support random farms being taken away if no one can prove that someone was actually dispossessed of it? They received a letter to advise them of inspection of the assets as well. So, it seems the government want the assets and/or infrastructure on the land in addition to the land.

There are so many things wrong with this case, it makes me sick to my stomach. This farmer should set up a fund for its legal costs. I will personally donate a ton of money to this issue.
Click to expand...

1. Supporting documentation proving that there is no proof of land claim? It was gazetted in 2006 to help you.
2. Supporting documentation proving that the business and assets on top of the land are not accounted for in the valuation?
3. I generally don't support expropriation, although if done legally following a proper and fair legal process, I can cope with it.
4. They also received a notice of expropriation in 2017 way before the ANC even started speaking of EWC.

You forget that expropriation with compensation is lawful, regulated and with a long case law behind it (and don't come up with the ANC starting of BS like that, how do you think highways and railways were built in every single country around the world? Through expropriation) and that it's what's happening here.

The land won't become government owned land, there is a plaintiff in this case who lodged the claim in 1996.

It's in court, the courts actually do work pretty well in SA and it is one of the institutions I confide in, I have no doubt that it will be solved properly by the court in charge of this case.
 
Last edited:
How our President is unable to recognize that the real crises is one of poverty, unemployment and a collapsing public services infrastructure is truly baffling. Is he really so out of touch?
 
BBSA said:
How our President is unable to recognize that the real crises is one of poverty, unemployment and a collapsing public services infrastructure is truly baffling. Is he really so out of touch?
Click to expand...
Black first land first and the EFF has been threatening violence and civil war over the land issue :(
 
f2wohf said:
1. Supporting documentation proving that there is no proof of land claim? It was gazetted in 2006 to help you.
2. Supporting documentation proving that the business and assets on top of the land are not accounted for in the valuation?
3. I generally don't support expropriation, although if done legally following a proper and fair legal process, I can cope with it.
4. They also received a notice of expropriation in 2017 way before the ANC even started speaking of EWC.

You forget that expropriation with compensation is lawful, regulated and with a long case law behind it (and don't come up with the ANC starting of BS like that, how do you think highways and railways were built in every single country around the world? Through expropriation) and that it's what's happening here.

The land won't become government owned land, there is a plaintiff in this case who lodged the claim in 1996.

It's in court, the courts actually do work pretty well in SA and it is one of the institutions I confide in, I have no doubt that it will be solved properly by the court in charge of this case.
Click to expand...

We are not talking about buying up property to improve public infrastructure. Highways and new infrastructure can be built around obstructions, so this is irrelevant.

My wording was not great in my earlier post. I understand that there is a claim. To restore someone's lost rights, the courts cannot unfairly prejudice someone else. The land owners of this specific farm placed a value on their own land linked to their future potential earnings/value of the business, and are questioning the validity of the claim. The land owner's apparent rejection of the sale is based on value and VALIDITY of the claim. Shutting this business down is unfair prejudice.

What is concerning is that the Courts are going to be forced to rely upon a vague and superficial notion of equity ("just and equitable" as you alluded to above) which is not really reflected in the law as yet. Maybe you could point me to something that the courts can work with to make this determination? The law holds that he who is unjustifiably enriched at the expense of another, is obliged, to the extent that it is reasonable, to compensate him by paying damages in the amount of his enrichment. The history of these issues will make is impossible to determine just and equitable damages.

In a free market, the supply and demand of goods and services are free from any intervention by a government, price-setting monopoly, or other authority. To determine these types of values, a system will have to be developed and will have to be managed by some sort of authority. Developed countries owe their success to separation of political and economic spheres. I am totally against price setting as it goes against these principles, and believe that the willing seller, willing buyer approach is the only sound economic decision. This is at the core of all these discussions and complaints on these forums. We are also looking to make Constitutional amendments without really understanding the problems from the current land reform program. You are an engineer. You should understand that trying to fix something without understand the underlying issue is a recipe for disaster.

No one is against expropriation in valid cases. What we are against is using this process as a way to spring board land ownership redistribution off of it.

I am not sure how long you have been in SA, but you need to know that there is a deep mistrust of the Government. It's almost cultural at this point. Maybe in Europe there is a belief that those governments will do what is best for all the people, that is not the case in this country. There are factions within the ANC that want ideological changes, and revenge, even if it means decimating the economy and building it up from scratch. This means that people will fight anything, even if they seem reasonable, down to the tooth and nail.
 
Last edited:
BBSA said:
How our President is unable to recognize that the real crises is one of poverty, unemployment and a collapsing public services infrastructure is truly baffling. Is he really so out of touch?
Click to expand...

Between 1904 and 1996 the black population of SA increased from 3 491 000 to 31 128 000 while the white population of SA increased from 1 116 000 to 4 435 000 in the same period.

With the majority breeding like bacteria, exacerbated by multiple wives and a dozen or more kids per family, it is not surprising that poverty, illiteracy and unemployment can only increase exponentially to a point where the whole country explodes in chaos and anarchy, worse than anything seen in post-colonial Africa.
 
nightjar said:
Between 1904 and 1996 the black population of SA increased from 3 491 000 to 31 128 000 while the white population of SA increased from 1 116 000 to 4 435 000 in the same period.

With the majority breeding like bacteria, exacerbated by multiple wives and a dozen or more kids per family, it is not surprising that poverty, illiteracy and unemployment can only increase exponentially to a point where the whole country explodes in chaos and anarchy, worse than anything seen in post-colonial Africa.
Click to expand...

Would you trust stats from the early 20th century, given accessibility and availability of infrastructure? The 3m figure could be people in (peri)urban areas where infrastructure was a lot better. SA was largely rural at the time.

/smh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X