There are different kinds of property rights. We have intellectual property - the use of state force to impose the idea that information is scarce when it is na

There are different kinds of property rights. We have intellectual property - the use of state force to impose the idea that information is scarce when it is naturally not - we have real estate, where an arbitrary box of space relative to planet Earth is assigned to you - and we have traditional goods, where you can have an apple and claim it is yours. The first two are complicated, because they are extremely political. To own geographic space is entirely divisive from owning just the dirt under a house, or the physical material that composes it. To own an idea, a trademark or a patent, is to assign exclusivity to thoughts. Its much easier to say "we have scarce goods, so those that create them can sell them, and the buyer owns it". Its why I think goods property is a good thing, but our attempts to strong arm real estate and IP into the same formula is a cause of constant economic tension because they aren't a good fit. Just in this context for reference, I'm an IP abolitionist and think we should adopt homesteading of property again. Both forms of state granted monopoly to space and idea are being rampantly exploited by market forces and were conceived of in an age when technology did not enable the information exchange we have today. It would have been much more complicated to verify usage of a plot of land a hundred years ago than it would now, to know who previously owned it and for how long it has been unused before you could claim it as your own.