Re:Controlling your own wealth as a basic human right
by vidarh on Wednesday January 25, 2017 @12:02PM
(#13483197)
You are jumping to the conclusion that any removal of property rights intrinsically and automatically removes peoples ability to make use of property.
That is a direct parallel to the entire point of the "property is theft" argument: that strict enforcement of property rights is a limitation on peoples ability to make use of property, by monopolising use of it.
You can destroy the ability to make use of property by going too far either way.
A good example of how carveouts can increase the ability of people to make use of property and improve their ability to provide for themselves is the Scandinavian "freedom to roam": In Norway anyone can use "outland" - areas that are not part of urban settlement. Owning the land gives you a monopoly on certain users (e.g. you will own hunting rights and forestry rights, for example) but far fewer than most other places.
Apart from providing liberty in the form of being able to go where we want without having to ask permission of land owners, for centuries this has been an important means for people to help provide for themselves: Nobody can deny you the ability to e.g. pick berries or mushrooms, or let your sheep graze, for example. It provides a substantial increase in utility of land that would often see substantially less use, and makes a lot of people able to be independent and work for themselves instead of someone else. That is one way it can increase liberty.
That is a direct parallel to the entire point of the "property is theft" argument: that strict enforcement of property rights is a limitation on peoples ability to make use of property, by monopolising use of it.
You can destroy the ability to make use of property by going too far either way.
A good example of how carveouts can increase the ability of people to make use of property and improve their ability to provide for themselves is the Scandinavian "freedom to roam": In Norway anyone can use "outland" - areas that are not part of urban settlement. Owning the land gives you a monopoly on certain users (e.g. you will own hunting rights and forestry rights, for example) but far fewer than most other places.
Apart from providing liberty in the form of being able to go where we want without having to ask permission of land owners, for centuries this has been an important means for people to help provide for themselves: Nobody can deny you the ability to e.g. pick berries or mushrooms, or let your sheep graze, for example. It provides a substantial increase in utility of land that would often see substantially less use, and makes a lot of people able to be independent and work for themselves instead of someone else. That is one way it can increase liberty.