Would you move to a remote area for free land?

@ArishMell Yeah, no one wants it

@ArishMell it’s not a catch. It’s part of the definition.

@Ferise1 Land no-one owns and has no value, then? Why?

@sstronaut I did wonder that! :-)

@ArishMell well that’s how America got started

@Ferise1 Only.... the land was already inhabited and used. It was only "free" to the colonialists.

@ArishMell it wasn’t inhabited or used

@Ferise1 Some was wild and empty, but not all of it, and none of the British and other European settlers from the 15C to 19C ever cared about the indigenous inhabitants whose lands they took over without compensation - hence "free".

The OP simply asks about "remote land" though, irrespective of conditions or anyone in fact already living there or using it.

@ArishMell the settlers didn’t mix with the indigenous tribes

@Ferise1 No, they didn't. They generally treated them very badly though, with this lingering even into the 1960s in some ways and countries.

Not only in what became called the United States of America, but in very many parts of the world.

@ArishMell I think the French mixed with them a little bit or a lot I’m not sure

@Ferise1 They could well have done. Some mixing would have occurred, but in most places the indigenous people really had little choice eventually but to become what was now the country's new society.