Comment 32628

By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted August 06, 2009 at 20:11:19

Grassroots >> the land belongs to all, people and all of the creatures on this earth.

If you believe this, then I guess you wouldn't mind if I turn your house into a storage bin for my garbage. If everyone has equal claim to each piece of land, then no individual, nor group of individuals can control it's use. In this scenario, where no one person(s) has exclusive property rights, what are the odds that people will invest time and effort trying to improve that land? If a bunch of jokers can lawfully decide it would be fun to burn down the home you just built, how many homes do you think will get built?

The truth is, land is only valuable when people manage it with an eye towards increasing it's value to either themselves or somebody else. That's why most of the GDP in Ontario is produced on land owned not by the government, but by private individuals and businesses.

>> Maybe the land should be shared, not owned, for the sake of profits that destroy mother nature.

Profits don't destroy "mother nature", indifference does that. Just compare a private community with public housing. Which land is better taken care of? When people can own land, they have a strong personal and monetary incentive to keep it in good repair and improve it. When land is owned by the "public", there is very little motivation to protect it or improve it.

Furthermore, when the public owns land, what that really means is that politicians own it. Because politicians can't directly benefit from improving the land, or by selling it, they have little motivation to take care of it.

Just as a shepherd protects his flock because he has great personal interest in doing so, people that own land outright do the same. Think about children, imagine if someone said that all children born are owned by the public. That would be a disaster. While people might not ever phrase it this way, parents instinctively believe that their children are their own personal treasure. They will fight to the death to protect this treasure and this "ownership" attitude produces healthy, happy children.

Ask yourself this, if private ownership of land is so bad, then why are the nations who are embracing private property rights also lifting millions of people out of poverty and starvation (China, Russia, India)? Closer to home, why are the First Nations people, with their inability to own individual plots of land on their reserves, such a basket case when it comes to producing their own sources of income? It's not because they lack talent, or creativity, it's because they lack a system that allows them to benefit from their personal hard work and enterprise.

When you combine private ownership with an equally important attitude of compassion and care for one's fellow man, you produce a society that is both wealthy and generous.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds