Virtually all of your e-mails concerning private property ultimately
have concluded that income disparritities are the problem. Thus, it
is not the instittution of private property that is the problem, but
the differences in income between groups. You could very well attack
the problem by declaring the concept of private property null and
void. The problem with that is I am moving in with you next week...oh
and I hate your couch so I am going to throw it out...along with your
television. By declaring private property null and void you chuck all
the defensive benefits you get with private property as well. There
is nothing stopping me from coming in and using your bed as a
bathroom. The same problem occurs with redistributing all the wealth
and sources of wealth. Such an act is essentially like saying, I
don't care if it is you car, you have to give it to Bob down the
street, since he doesn't have as good a job as you.

I am not sure how one can use property offensively. Are employers
saying you will work here or...or...or we wont let you on company
property. Are you saying that there is only one job available for a
person forever, and that if they loose that job they will never find
another? I would think a communist or socialist system would be more
prone to such abuses than the free market.

Steve





---Bryan Hyden wrote:
>
> >You still haven't shown how private property has resulted in a bad
> >outcome.
>
> i think that i did. i showed how it can now be used as an 'offensive'
> power. granted, i didn't go very deeply into it, but i don't feel
like i am
> ready to do that yet. i need to learn more about it first (which is
> something i find myself repeating again and again). but i don't
think that
> that lack of total knowledge should stop me from discussing it. if
someone,
> somewhere along the way can show me where my reasoning is faulty or
can show
> me a better way, then i will learn from it. putting everything into
a pot
> certainly doesn't sound like a possibility. the intention behind it
might
> be worth fleshing out some, and if you get the inspiration to do
such a
> thing and share it with us, i'd be glad to look at it.
>
> >Tell me when you are hungry do you take a nap?
>
> this seems like an intentionally obtuse question to me. where did
you get
> this from? it sort of sounds like you are implying that i was
trying to
> solve one thing by doing something completely different? how do you
mean?
> are you saying that we should keep private property but that we should
> redistribute the wealth? ok, ok... as i ask these questions i'm
beginning
> to think i understand you, though i still think you could have
worded the
> question a bit more civilly... and if you think that is the
answer, and if
> you are inclined to speak on it, how do you see that solution tying
in with
> the other factors currently present in the world (ie political
boundaries,
> increasing population, deforrestation, starvation, ect.)? and if my
> question isn't clear, just ignore it.... i'm feeling a little
rushed right
> now and don't have the time or will to clarify it any more at this
time....
>
> spirit
>

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%