XPost: soc.culture.jewish
From: joshb@xs4all.nl
On 2019-11-06, rbowman wrote:
> On 11/06/2019 04:27 AM, Jos Boersema wrote:
>> Land underpins a free market economy, and it is an insurance policy for
>> people who become unemployed. It allows those who want to, to start a
>> business very easily, and it also challenges those to do that even if
>> they do not want to, but they must because they must eat and they can
>> otherwise not find a serf position that pays them enough. Getting a job
>> is in the end a privilege, you cannot rely on it.
>
> I have never owned land and had no problem starting a business.
You give no details. There are some trades that seem not to use land,
for example a traveling repair man. Even they will tend to benefit from
land, for example if they want to diversify, or just haul some device to
a shed and work on it there, or do whatever else. If they got land they
have a heard start compared to *not* having land.
Having land is a benefit to starting a business in general, although
not quite but comparable to having money to start a business. Someone may
have been able to start a business without land (of course many people
do so), but they neither know (by experience) that it likely would have
been easier while having the option of using their free land, or what
that effect of everyone owning free land would have had on the structure
of the market generally. A traveling repair man benefits from all having
land, because there are more people with some wealth to pay for their
service, as opposed to all being slaves to the One (few) Business(es)
that Rules.
> In fact
> being linked to a specific geographical point would have been
> detrimental.
The land is not geographically fixed. You can swap trade and rent it
out. You can also swap trade it with the public buffer, which means you
can really quickly move your land around. I have explained this
countless times, by the way.
> Some of us a hunter-gatherers, so to speak, some are
> farmers. Historically, the concept of owning a particular chunk of the
> earth lead to hierarchical social structures and serfdom.
Exactly: because a few claim the land that by right should belong to
others. Unless you want to go back to the stone age - which is indeed
the other option and the one other option in the long term - you need to
stop stealing people their land and pressing them into serfdom because
of it.
There is also another effect at play: technology can dramatically
increase once you have fixed living on the land. Before you could only
own what you could carry, but now you can leave things standing where
you make them. The economy specializes more once you have fixed
living. There would already have been specialization possible, but the
rise of technology gives rise to more specializations. Because with
humans violence and anti-social evil behavior enters the picture in a
big way, it is easy to see how this causes whole generations of people
to be pressed into serfdom where otherwise when "we would all be on the
move to our next camp" there simply was less 'technical ability' (so to
say) to press people into permanent serfdom. You could not build a
castle back then, to commit raides on the villages of people who rebel
your rule, for example. You could not feed a big army, at all. All these
things that we can do now, are caused by farming and settled living. One
expression of that violence people have, is denying each other their
right to land.
The ability to cause serfdom is increased greatly by settled living, and
this serfdom used to be expressed in a big way by people not owning
their equal value share of land by right. Today this is less visible but
still underlying the system.
> Many people around here own, or at least occupy at the sufferance of the
> bank they are indebted to, their McMansions on five or ten acres of
> land. The land is not arable and would have trouble supporting a goat.
It is not about farming, as I have written dozens of times. Always the
same mistake with these people. Why is it so hard to understand that it
is about *value* and the equality of land value in the economy as a
starting point for all.
You want to be a serf, and live with serfs while the few Oligarchs and
rich own all your land. If you aren't there yet, you will soon be with
your failed laws. You mentioned something about foraging ? Some are
hunters, some are farmers ? Are you speaking about a few people who
hunt in the American mountains ? Soon you cannot do that anymore,
because the hunting rights are owned by Google or the Rockefeller
family. Is that what you want ? Under a system of natural resource
distribution (which is what this is about, I use 'land' to simplify it
for people because people are so dumbed down), hunting rights would also
be distributed. If you want a lot of hunting rights, you can rent them
from those who don't use them. You can then hunt and live.
You thought you could "just buy land" ? Even that is a mirrage that can
disappear. Who says that people who eventually own everything will ever
want to sell ? If I was as evil as the people who rule the USA, I would
in the end never sell my land, because by owning the land I would own
everyone and everything.
You know, at some point this is not a debate anymore. This is a
separation of one kind from another kind of people. The serfs to one
end, the free people to the other. Guess who will be the landless ones,
will the landless ones be the free ones, or the serfs.
--
https://market.socialism.nl How economics works, and how to get it fixed.
Free Julian Assange and all other people attacked by western Fascism.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
