Here's the use of the word the American Dream: — René Descartes
TO provide the sort of infrastructure capital needs to work it is vitally necessary to run most services at cost through the public sector taxation. Without this capitalism would not thrive. Think roads, police fire, schools. The state preserves the power to seize what land it needs for these activities.1. Add a rule: You're not allowed to transfer ownership to the State. That in itself is a limitation to property rights so seems a bad choice given the framework. — Benkei
That would be absurd. It's recipe for fall and decline.2. Add a rule: A duty on the State to minimise public ownership. That could work (and raises practical issues but let's leave that for now).
What is property? Property is theft.3. Amend the ideology: it's not about private ownership but about respect of ownership in itself regardless of whether this is public or private. This could work too.
1. Add a rule: You're not allowed to transfer ownership to the State. That in itself is a limitation to property rights so seems a bad choice given the framework.
2. Add a rule: A duty on the State to minimise public ownership. That could work (and raises practical issues but let's leave that for now).
3. Amend the ideology: it's not about private ownership but about respect of ownership in itself regardless of whether this is public or private. This could work too. — Benkei
No, I don't think marxists are the truly religious ones. Some marxists are good people, some capitalists are good people. — Bitter Crank
What is property? Property is theft.
— charleton
"Theft" implies taking someone else's property. If property is theft, then who is being stolen from? — Arkady
I know it cause I've had this conversation before. — René Descartes
Then the commons stole it, if we accept the premise that "property is theft."Sure, it was. — unenlightened
Isn't anyone I posted a remark to their post going to bother honoring it with at least a reply back? — dclements
Then appropriating it for personal use isn't theft, as theft is the unlawful appropriation of someone else's property. If it's not "owned by anyone/anything including itself," then it's not property, and if it's not property, then its appropriation for private use does not constitute theft, contra the thesis that "[all] property is theft."The point of unenlightened's I think you missed is that commons can not steal whatever "it" is because the commons is neither owned by ANYONE nor a entity in and of itself like a corporation is, so it isn't really owned by anyone/anything including itself. — dclements
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.