Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2013 9:23:21 GMT -5
First principle: land should never be property.
|
|
|
Post by ahinton on Nov 27, 2013 9:57:13 GMT -5
First principle: land should never be property. It isn't only that anyway but, if not at all, what should it be and how otherwise would you account for its ownership?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2013 13:27:02 GMT -5
Land could be a common, ahinton.
|
|
|
Post by ahinton on Nov 27, 2013 13:43:07 GMT -5
Land could be a common, ahinton. By this I take it to mean that certain land for communal use could be owned by a community, which already happens with local authority owned land, National Trust land and other instances - but it all still has to be owned by someone or some organisation and accordingly it has a value.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2013 13:52:09 GMT -5
What value, ahinton?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2013 14:28:12 GMT -5
it all still has to be owned by someone or some organisation and accordingly it has a value. Not so. None of it all has to be owned and accordingly none of it all has an intrinsic "value" in that sense. Certain areas may of course from time to time be reserved for a purpose. "Let us build a great school . . . well here!" Then simply proceed to do it; no problems.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2013 15:16:04 GMT -5
Is the builder of your school to work for free, Sydney?
|
|
|
Post by ahinton on Nov 27, 2013 16:25:23 GMT -5
What value, ahinton? That which the market puts upon it.
|
|
|
Post by ahinton on Nov 27, 2013 16:29:41 GMT -5
it all still has to be owned by someone or some organisation and accordingly it has a value. Not so. None of it all has to be owned and accordingly none of it all has an intrinsic "value" in that sense. Certain areas may of course from time to time be reserved for a purpose. "Let us build a great school . . . well here!" Then simply proceed to do it; no problems. No. No value, no ownership, therefore no jurisdiction and therefore no building thereon even if for no better reasons than that there would be no one to provide legal permission for such building - but who in any case would contemplate building something that would cost a lot of money upon land deemed to have no value? Who would invest the necessary monies in such a project if said project is economically and commercially doomed from the outset? No one - that's who - so it wouldn't get built. Simples.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2013 17:59:42 GMT -5
. . . but who in any case would contemplate building something that would cost a lot of money upon land deemed to have no value? . . . Those benevolent robots which/who in the future will govern us who have proved incapable of governing ourselves. That's who.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2013 18:09:50 GMT -5
Is the builder of your school to work for free, Sydney? Of course. We all eagerly await do we not the day when "money" will have become old hat.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2013 1:48:13 GMT -5
The builder of your great school eagerly awaits the day when you will not pay him for his labour, Sydney!
|
|
|
Post by ahinton on Nov 28, 2013 2:46:36 GMT -5
. . . but who in any case would contemplate building something that would cost a lot of money upon land deemed to have no value? . . . Those benevolent robots which/who in the future will govern us who have proved incapable of governing ourselves. That's who. You could almost see that one coming, couldn't you?! Whilst I've never noted any reference to benevolence in your past mentions of robots taking over government, I note that none of them account for the fact that robots are designed, manufactured, operated and ultimately disposed of by those very kinds of people - humans - whom you claim to have proved incapable of governing us; if humans are incapable of governing, what price any robots that they design, make and operate?!
|
|
|
Post by ahinton on Nov 28, 2013 2:48:21 GMT -5
Is the builder of your school to work for free, Sydney? Of course. We all eagerly await do we not the day when "money" will have become old hat. Who's "we" here? This is another of your old hobby-horses in which your references have not, as far as I can recall, identified with what you propose money should be replaced or indeed how?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2013 4:43:45 GMT -5
As Herodotus in 450 B.C. pointed out, the Lydians's striking of the first metal coins around 620 B.C. meant that commodities ceased to be exchanged for other commodities, and there came into existence a distinct profession of retailers, as opposed to craftsmen. Bad move! Wrong direction! The insertion of the middle-man into the process of exchange greatly increased the potential for crooked dealings. So let us return to the conditions of 650 B.C. forthwith, and make a sweeping new start, forgetting the middle-men. Who knows where we will go from there!
|
|