weeden, i do appreciate the compliment even as i doubt its correctness.
the land ownership question interests me. I do believe deep down inside that granting and holding perpetual title to land and the assets under it is unsustainable. However i cannot come up with a practicable alternative. The bad thing about landownership is that it promotes monopolies and empire and the general evil of men toward other men. I am sensitive to abandon's argument that landownership may very well be a moral failure comparable to slavery.
We were landless nomads once, but that path is closed. We hold title to land now, with benefits and serious defects in that system. I imagine/hope that there will be a better way, but i cannot envision it.
I cannot come up with an alternative. It always boils down to one thing: Who is in charge, and
quis custodiet custodes? any system that administers matters of power (and access to land and resources is the cornerstone of power) is corruptible as long as humans run it. There always are
custodes, the folks with the final say. "we are a nation of laws and not men" is a bold statement but not quite right.
The fact that not one banker is in federal ass-bleed prison after heisting billions confirms the
incorrectness of the sentiment for me. Cn