Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 v7 ucbtopaz-1.8; site ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!ucbvax!ucbtopaz!mwm From: mwm@ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA Newsgroups: net.politics.theory Subject: What is property? Message-ID: <851@ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA> Date: Mon, 25-Mar-85 23:38:42 EST Article-I.D.: ucbtopaz.851 Posted: Mon Mar 25 23:38:42 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 28-Mar-85 01:23:45 EST References: <370@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP> <5252@utzoo.UUCP> <4985@ukc.UUCP> <836@ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA> <1853@sdcrdcf.UUCP> Reply-To: mwm@ucbtopaz.UUCP (Praiser of Bob) Organization: Missionaria Phonibalonica Lines: 48 Summary: In article <1853@sdcrdcf.UUCP> jonab@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Jonathan Biggar) writes: >>Not in my libertarian society, he didn't. The dead don't have property >>rights to be violated, so they can't state what the money should be >>used for. >Then your society isn't very libertarian. My society is every bit as libertarian as yours is, in that property rights are sacred. However, as it says above, in my society, your property rights end when you die. There are a variety of good reasons to do this, but the easiest one can be found in the use <-> own isomorphism. If you're dead, you obviously aren't using any property, hence can't own any. How can you give away something you don't own? >If I want to make a will >that designates the distribution of my worldly goods upon my death, >who are you to say that I can't do that? Is this any different than >putting money in a trust fund for my benificiary with the agreement >that as long as I live I can do anything I want with the money in >the fund? Yes, it is. In the trust fund case, you've established joint ownership of the funds before you died. >In a true libertarian society, my heirs have NO right to any of my >property, but I have EVERY right to give it to whomever I please >when I die. If you replace the word "when" with the word "before," I agree completely. Obviously, we have different definitions of "libertarian society." Yours is somewhat to the right of mine, but both are still libertarian societies. Granted that all libertarian societies respect property rights, that still leaves the question of "what is property" open. The practical definition is "property is that to which the state grants property rights." I find this unsatisfactory <- obvious sarcasm :->. I'm still working on a definition of "property" that fits my sense of propriety. It seems that if somebody using something doesn't deprive you (even temporarily) of the use of the property, then your property rights haven't been violated. As pointed out above, not allowing an inheritance doesn't violate any property rights. Likewise, the concept of "intellectual property" vanishes. Any comments from the hordes of the net?