In this case undeveloped. We Also have a lot of preserved land around us, but it is not ubiquitous.
Even then, preserved land can be tricky. A lot of State-preserved farms and lands were recently threatened by a project that was seeking Federal eminent domain rights. Federal ED would have wiped out the State level conservation.
Fortunately we were able to persuade the developer to give up (over the course of 7 or so year fight).
“Underutilized”, that’s a notable word choice. It implies that the land should be utilized more? With whose interests in mind? Who decides? Over what time frame?
Talking about utilization in this way is a decent predictor of a libertarian framing. It is worth saying in tech forums that libertarianism isn’t the only political philosophy that includes market forces as a key analysis mechanism.
I prefer the study of political economy over traditional economics, because it admits a much wider lens of the underlying aims of a well functioning economic system. It doesn’t have to be economic efficiency as defined by a summation of individual utilities. That is only one mathematically convenient objective function; there are others.
Economics is a big tent. Economists have varying political philosophies. Relatively few educated economists hold idealistic notions about how well actual markets function to optimize a social welfare function.
But from what I’ve seen, relatively few outspoken libertarians rigorously challenge their assumptions about markets or the overall objective function. Many conflate a descriptive theory with a normative value system.
Yes, this is a long reply to a seven word comment. Why bother? Given the context around the thread, plus some consistent blind spots from HN comments, suggests to me that many here should go deeper and ask more questions about political economy.
