Property?

[Moskitto]

How should property be owned?

Should we have people being allowed to own what they like but they can't abuse people?

Should businesses and land be owned by the populous but peoples individual possesions are owned by the individuals although the people are trusted to allow others to use them if they can?

Should everything be owned by the populous but people are given the "right" to use it (such as the situation with computer games)?

Or should absolutely everything be owned by everyone?

I think i'm between the second and the third way in my views.

[gogo gomez]

Quote: from Moskitto on 12:29 am on Nov. 14, 2001
How should property be owned?

Should we have people being allowed to own what they like but they can't abuse people?

Should businesses and land be owned by the populous but peoples individual possesions are owned by the individuals although the people are trusted to allow others to use them if they can?

Should everything be owned by the populous but people are given the "right" to use it (such as the situation with computer games)?

Or should absolutely everything be owned by everyone?

I think i'm between the second and the third way in my views.

aye yai yai, moskitto you make my brain hurt with these analyzations. that depends on many things; for one if we speak of americas then we much consider the natives of the land, no? and if we do well...gee there really isnt a logical solution; or is there?

there are just too many people in the world to answer realistic but "yes" i believe everyone should own a small piece of land that would pass down from generation to generation but you would have to be living in a non-capitalist, ungreedy, family oriented world. and guess what? good question though. what is your thought? i dont remember you giving one. (sorry)

[Moskitto]

I think I believe that Big things like factories should be the property of everyone but small things should be peoples own possesions which they are trusted to let others use if they can.

[DaNatural]

good question mosk, id have to see that if a state of philosopher kings were to rule then putting the property in the hands of the state wouldnt be bad. As they would'nt be corrupted by material things. factories will be owned by the state and all the workers will get a share of profits, each person makes up a piece of the puzzle. I think this can come about only in a society where we have philisopher kings or cultivated minds running things. peace

[ShadowOfGuest]

Simple way of doing this.
All capital objects are owned collectively by the state, i.e. the means of production, the means of transport etc.

And then people can receive 'rations' on items, with the state attempting to produce items equating to the demand. Obviously, however, some items might be harder to procure, if made of rare materials etc, such things would therefore be worth more rationaing points. If you want a gold necklace, you can have less food.

Only items like food, personal jewelry, clothes and other such should be individually owned.

The big question i cant answer? living space. Should people live in communal spaces? or maybe in individual houses or flats? not sure really, and you wouldn't really be able to put rations on it, because a house is worth a hell of a lot of food....

[Moskitto]

There's a problem with just giving everyone an equal amount of everything. There's some things people don't need.

For example I don't need an Ice Hockey stick just like you don't need a Braca-Sport Canoe-20 C1 Paddle.

[Valkyrie]

"Each according to his need......"

Bras and tampons for women, jock straps and hemroid meds for men. Not sure about the Ms. Kitty vibe - essential or non? (just kidding)

Everyone needs shelter,therefore shelter should be owned with a clause that you cannot sell for profit.

I don't know about the idea of communal living for single people. families already live communally, so thats not a problem.

Canoes and the like should be societal property for use.

That;s just my opinion.

[Guest]

*looks back over his post*
yep, i thought so, i didn't once mention that everyone shoukd get an equal amount of everything...

[Moskitto]

Canoes and the like should be societal property for use.

Yeah but the thing is the one's I use are modified towards each persons individual comforts so It would be impractical for somoene else to come along and say "It's mine" and spend about half an hour rearranging the board. But I do let people use it.

[Valkyrie]

Well, Moskitto, if I remember right, you're eligible to compete in the Olympics on a rowing team. In this case, you have a special ability, so the "each according to his need, each according to his ability" would apply to you.

Now, I suppose someone will bring up that a "special ability or talent"is showing or rewarding elitism. So, Be it.

[Moskitto]

Well the thing with rewarding talent like that is that some might argue that sport is becoming too much about equipment rather than individual ability.

But at least under that system people would be rewarded based on talent rather than being able to get rewards just from having financial backing.

P.S. It's Canoe + Kayak Racing (Canoe for me :)) not rowing but everyone makes that mistake.

[CommieBastard]

A state-owned economy could provide sports equipment to whoever wanted it (if specialised and fitted equipment was needed), while also making available in public sports centres that which does not need special thingie majigs...