The Georgists

[AlanM]

This is why we have distinctions on types of property. Personal property is that which you rightfully own outright. "Real Estate" is a separate type of property that, in Orwellian fashion, was misnamed to make it appear like a natural right instead of the civil right it actually is.

Here is the crux of the matter. It all depends on WHAT distinctions you place on it.
If I pick up an apple which has fallen off a wild tree, can I claim it for my property?

Given the assumption that the tree is indeed wild, I see no problem with making a claim on the fallen apple. I do see a difference with making a claim on the land on which the tree is growing.

Why? The apple was not mine. it was wild. I did not grow it. I did not mix my labor with it. It is a thing of nature. God-given, as is the land. I make no distinctions.

[Lex]

Why? The apple was not mine. it was wild. I did not grow it. I did not mix my labor with it. It is a thing of nature. God-given, as is the land. I make no distinctions.

It's very simple Alan, you must cut the apple into many pieces and share it with all your neighbors - OR - pay economic rent to everyone after you sell the apple at the market. 

[AlanM]

Why? The apple was not mine. it was wild. I did not grow it. I did not mix my labor with it. It is a thing of nature. God-given, as is the land. I make no distinctions.

It's very simple Alan, you must cut the apple into many pieces and share it with all your neighbors - OR - pay economic rent to everyone after you sell the apple at the market.?

*throws paring knife away* 

[Lex]

Why? The apple was not mine. it was wild. I did not grow it. I did not mix my labor with it. It is a thing of nature. God-given, as is the land. I make no distinctions.

It's very simple Alan, you must cut the apple into many pieces and share it with all your neighbors - OR - pay economic rent to everyone after you sell the apple at the market. 

*throws paring knife away* 

In that case a mob of Georgists will tear you to pieces and your apple.

[AlanM]

Why? The apple was not mine. it was wild. I did not grow it. I did not mix my labor with it. It is a thing of nature. God-given, as is the land. I make no distinctions.

It's very simple Alan, you must cut the apple into many pieces and share it with all your neighbors - OR - pay economic rent to everyone after you sell the apple at the market.?

*throws paring knife away*?

In that case a mob of Georgists will tear you to pieces and your apple.

Not without a fight they won't. 

[ladyattis]

If you control the land it is yours, plain and simple. Farmers control the land to grow things. A factory owner controls the land to make things. A real estate agent controls land to sell it to other people. I see no distinction between a pencil or a parcel of land. Both require control and both require the capacity to claim the action of control. The distinction is born of your mind and not the action(s) itself.

-- Bridget

[Cotton]

Shut up Bill

Tracy...nice to communicate again with you too - I can see that you have missed me!

Hey, what happen between you and your libertarian socialist buddy Green?

Bill G. I think Bill A got booted for calling someone a nasty name when he got drunk one friday night.                               
    Am I going to have to show you all on this board  why mainsream libertarians, conservatives, geolibertarians, mutualist, socialist and progressive democrats are wrong on the land issue.                                                                 
  Some good points were brought up at the Left libertarian board, on the Mutualist board and the FSP board, I though we all had made progress in our discussions and negotiation.

[AlanM]

Shut up Bill

Tracy...nice to communicate again with you too - I can see that you have missed me!

Hey, what happen between you and your libertarian socialist buddy Green?

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Bill G. I think Bill A got booted for calling someone a nasty name when he got drunk one friday night.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? Am I going to have to show you all on this board? why mainsream libertarians, conservatives, geolibertarians, mutualist, socialist and progressive democrats are wrong on the land issue.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? Some good points were brought up at the Left libertarian board, on the Mutualist board and the FSP board, I though we all had made progress in our discussions and negotiation.

Fire away.

[Lex]

Am I going to have to show you all on this board  why mainsream libertarians, conservatives, geolibertarians, mutualist, socialist and progressive democrats are wrong on the land issue. Some good points were brought up at the Left libertarian board, on the Mutualist board and the FSP board, I though we all had made progress in our discussions and negotiation.

We should all move to Mars?

[Cotton]

What gives you (or anyone) the right to deny others use of a portion of the land?

You didn't create the land, and neither did anyone else. The land is not the result of anyone's work or life, unlike improvements made to the land, like clearing it of trees for farming or building a house.

Why do you get exclusive right to any particular area? It is certainly not because you can make use of it (this is where Locke fails). Those protesting in New London should understand this, since if making use of the land is the criteria, then Pfizer should get the land because they will be using it more productively.

You also can't go by the childish "I saw it first" criteria, because "no, you didn't". Example: An explorer treks into Kentucky and finds a nice lot of land. He spends a couple months clearing a place to farm, seeing no other living person the entire time. Just when his first crops are ready for picking, a group of natives come by and demand he leave their hunting land. In any system where there can be competing claims, there needs to be a system of adjudicating disputes - thus government (for resolving disputes over land ownership).

Please take some time to actually think about land.

Henry George may have had some loony ideas, but he was pretty well spot on when it came to land and taxation.

I consider land ownership to be a civil right, not a human right; as in it is a created right not an inherent one.

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Use and occupation gives a person that right, you found it, you use it, no one else is using it, it is yours. If everyone in the ?village uses it but not necessarliy on the same day then it is commonly used by the people of the village. If you come from the other side of the world ?say Scotland you don't have a right to demand the Cherokee of North Carolina give you land to use. If you are a villager that encloses the common used land then you owe the other villagers compensation. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?If you are the Scotsman your Scottish Villagers or the Barons may owe you compensation but the Cherokee villagers in NC. do not. The Cherokee may understand that most Scotsman are poor stewards practicing slash and burn crop production and have no understanding of birth control, so your demands as a Scotsmen mean nothing in the Cherokee village, come to them like a decent civil person and something ?might be worked out, if not go back to Scotland and take your case up there.

[Cotton]

Am I going to have to show you all on this board? why mainsream libertarians, conservatives, geolibertarians, mutualist, socialist and progressive democrats are wrong on the land issue. Some good points were brought up at the Left libertarian board, on the Mutualist board and the FSP board, I though we all had made progress in our discussions and negotiation.

We should all move to Mars?

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? Not unless you want to and have the ablity. I perfer not to for a few decades.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? Now my point was all the above are wrong on some points of the land issue. I have pointed out where they are wrong on other boards but I'm not the only one. This has been gone over and over on the FSP board. The land issue is best decided case by case, from the bottom up.? ?That is the rational just way to do it.

[Lex]

Use and occupation gives a person that right, you found it, you use it, no one else is using it, it is yours. If everyone in the  village uses it but not necessarliy on the same day then it is commonly used by the people of the village. If you come from the other side of the world  say Scotland you don't have a right to demand the Cherokee of North Carolina give you land to use. If you are a villager that encloses the common used land then you owe the other villagers compensation.                               
If you are the Scotsman your Scottish Villagers or the Barons may owe you compensation but the Cherokee villagers in NC. do not. The Cherokee may understand that most Scotsman are poor stewards practicing slash and burn crop production and have no understanding of birth control, so your demands as a Scotsmen mean nothing in the Cherokee village, come to them like a decent civil person and something  might be worked out, if not go back to Scotland and take your case up there.

Is this Hankster? I recognize a total lack of coherency and any kind of logic which makes me think Cotton is Hankster...

[Lex]

This has been gone over and over on the FSP board.

Oh, wow! So you come here, announce that we are all wrong, spew some random garbage, then proceed to tell us that you will not explain why we are wrong and that we should go look elsewhere for that info?

Why don't you stick a sock in it buddy!

[KBCraig]

If you come from the other side of the world  say Scotland you don't have a right to demand the Cherokee of North Carolina give you land to use. If you are a villager that encloses the common used land then you owe the other villagers compensation.                               
                If you are the Scotsman your Scottish Villagers or the Barons may owe you compensation but the Cherokee villagers in NC. do not. The Cherokee may understand that most Scotsman are poor stewards practicing slash and burn crop production and have no understanding of birth control, so your demands as a Scotsmen mean nothing in the Cherokee village, come to them like a decent civil person and something  might be worked out, if not go back to Scotland and take your case up there.

A very poor example. The Scots and Cherokees were happily intertwined, with the Cherokees adopting many of the Euro-American ways that they saw to be of value.

You should read up on John Ross, an ancestor of mine who was principle chief of the Cherokee Nation from 1839 until his death in 1866. He was also 7/8ths Scot.

Kevin

[Cotton]

This has been gone over and over on the FSP board.

Oh, wow! So you come here, announce that we are all wrong, spew some random garbage, then proceed to tell us that you will not explain why we are wrong and that we should go look elsewhere for that info?

Why don't you stick a sock in it buddy!

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? I did not mean that you are wrong but the above mainstream sectors on the land issue are wrong and I told you why they are wrong because the issue is a case by case issue. Case by case for disputes in discussion, negotiation, mediation, consenuses building and civil jury trials starts with the Anglo- American common law occupation and use is nine tenths of the law on property issues. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ?You can keep your sock.