Land rent ad infinitum, ad nauseum

[FrankChodorov]

What kind of an answer is THAT

an appropriate one based on the philosophy of individual ownership rights held in common.

again, you do not deny that all surface water over 20 acres and all groundwater is owned in common with the state as the public trustee - do you?

While it's true that no one person can 'own' the water supply, MY WELL is private. value added by ME,  and thus the fruits of which are not subject to REDISTRIBUTION.
If I plant a tree on my property, I don't have to  give the state my apples!

bad analogy...I am not suggesting that the economic rent collected go to the state but rather to all the owners of the common asset equally.

if the money collected were kept by the state then the water would be owned collectively rather than in common.

you will be asked to no longer use the well then...

[BaRbArIaN]

Hey landsocialist, would you also apply your philosophy to solar energy?  After all, people that live in places with lower levels of sunlight could make some claim to the commons of the sunlight that falls on say Arizona, then try to force solar energy producers there to ship them up some megawattage as compensation for denying them the right to put their panels anywhere they want right?

[CNHT]

Hey landsocialist, would you also apply your philosophy to solar energy?  After all, people that live in places with lower levels of sunlight could make some claim to the commons of the sunlight that falls on say Arizona, then try to force solar energy producers there to ship them up some megawattage as compensation for denying them the right to put their panels anywhere they want right?

The idea of 'common' assets, even when referring to natural resources is NOT a concept that is libertarian, to my mind anyway.
If it's on your property, it's yours as far as I'm concerned.
What he is saying is rather a stretch...and believe me, there is NO precedent for it in NH.

Russell, if you fall into my well, you still belong to Kat.. LOL and I would respect that! (Although you WOULD be all wet...hahahah)

[FrankChodorov]

would you also apply your philosophy to solar energy?

yes - but solar energy would not apply because one leaves "enough and as good in common for others" (Locke's proviso)

[FrankChodorov]

The idea of 'common' assets, even when referring to natural resources is NOT a concept that is libertarian, to my mind anyway.

except that the whole concept of negative liberties is built upon common rights.

you are free to live your life so long as one does not infringe on mine...ring a bell?

once again do you deny that all water over 20 acres and all groundwater is owned in common in NH with the state as the public trustee?

[CNHT]

The idea of 'common' assets, even when referring to natural resources is NOT a concept that is libertarian, to my mind anyway.

except that the whole concept of negative liberties is built upon common rights.

you are free to live your life so long as one does not infringe on mine...ring a bell?

once again do you deny that all water over 20 acres and all groundwater is owned in common in NH with the state as the public trustee?

Nope I don't deny anything, except that the State of NH cannot and will not meter my well. PERIOD.

[FrankChodorov]

The idea of 'common' assets, even when referring to natural resources is NOT a concept that is libertarian, to my mind anyway.

except that the whole concept of negative liberties is built upon common rights.

you are free to live your life so long as one does not infringe on mine...ring a bell?

once again do you deny that all water over 20 acres and all groundwater is owned in common in NH with the state as the public trustee?

Nope I don't deny anything, except that the State of NH cannot and will not meter my well. PERIOD.

but when the time comes - they can and will prevent you from infringing on my individual equal access opportunity right beyond Locke's proviso and they will be morally justified in using force doing it!

[CNHT]

The idea of 'common' assets, even when referring to natural resources is NOT a concept that is libertarian, to my mind anyway.

except that the whole concept of negative liberties is built upon common rights.

you are free to live your life so long as one does not infringe on mine...ring a bell?

once again do you deny that all water over 20 acres and all groundwater is owned in common in NH with the state as the public trustee?

Nope I don't deny anything, except that the State of NH cannot and will not meter my well. PERIOD.

but when the time comes - they can and will prevent you from infringing on my individual equal access opportunity right beyond Locke's proviso and they will be morally justified in using force doing it!

My dear Frank, now you have PROVEN you are NO LIBERTARIAN. Libertarians do NOT sanction force for any reason.
If they don't sanction force against Al Qaeda, then they are certainly not going to stand by you and sanction it against me, just because I happned to have drilled into an aquifer in a good spot!!!!   

[BaRbArIaN]

Yep, somehow the land socialistas seem to be able to couch "from each according to his abilities, to each according to their needs" as a libertarian maxim.  Good wordsmithery, bad philosophic underpinning.   I don't know what major malfunction has occurred with Georgists, but I'm glad its not spreading.  Would end up getting bloody.

[FrankChodorov]

you have PROVEN you are NO LIBERTARIAN. Libertarians do NOT sanction force for any reason.

the point, if you had been paying any attention at all, is that if the resource is owned in common (you do agree don't you that groundwater is owned in common in NH?) and you access it after Locke's proviso has been crossed (enough and as good left in common for others) then it is YOU who is commiting force against ME as I (and others) will be economically harmed by your withdrawl

and therefore rather than sanctioning an unjustified use of force, it is preventing a THEFT of my individual equal access rights claim.

put that in your water pipe and smoke it...

[CNHT]

you have PROVEN you are NO LIBERTARIAN. Libertarians do NOT sanction force for any reason.

the point, if you had been paying any attention at all, is that if the resource is owned in common (you do agree don't you that groundwater is owned in common in NH?) and you access it after Locke's proviso has been crossed (enough and as good left in common for others) then it is YOU who is commiting force against ME as I (and others) will be economically harmed by your withdrawl

and therefore rather than sanctioning an unjustified use of force, it is preventing a THEFT of my individual equal access rights claim.

put that in your water pipe and smoke it...

As long as he is not a state employee with a meter, I don't care what he thinks.

[Ron Helwig]

I don't accept Locke's proviso. It is totally subjective.

[Kat Kanning]

He isn't a libertarian, he's a communist.  Why are you arguing with a troll?

[FrankChodorov]

I don't accept Locke's proviso. It is totally subjective.

the subjectiveness comes from each individual deciding whether or not to pay someone rent to locate in a space previously claimed or freely access another part of the commons to enclose exclusively for themselves.

Ron,

why would I pay someone rent subjecting myself to being economically disadvantaged if I subjectively have determined that there is "enough and as good" left for me to FREELY homestead myself?

[FrankChodorov]

you have PROVEN you are NO LIBERTARIAN. Libertarians do NOT sanction force for any reason.

the point, if you had been paying any attention at all, is that if the resource is owned in common (you do agree don't you that groundwater is owned in common in NH?) and you access it after Locke's proviso has been crossed (enough and as good left in common for others) then it is YOU who is commiting force against ME as I (and others) will be economically harmed by your withdrawl

and therefore rather than sanctioning an unjustified use of force, it is preventing a THEFT of my individual equal access rights claim.

put that in your water pipe and smoke it...

As long as he is not a state employee with a meter, I don't care what he thinks.

then your only choices will be a meter or a concrete truck filling in your well...