3 ms·

I'm a Georgist, and I really don't understand the justification one can make for the acquisition of natural resources, and the justification for passing the ren

I'm a Georgist, and I really don't understand the justification one can make for the acquisition of natural resources, and the justification for passing the rents this generates to one's descendants. Any absolute property rights granted in this space inherently justify feudalism, I believe, which violates concepts of fairness (I tend to be a Rawlsian, but I think feudalism violates almost any idea of fairness). What responses do you have to such criticisms of property rights in land?

atemerev 10y ago
This is one of the two issues where I am not in complete agreement with Ayn Rand's theory (she thought that first come/first served approach is OK with land grab and other natural resources like frequency bands; and free market should diffuse the resources to the most efficient actors if competition and trade are not restricted.) This sounds logical (land grabs were OK when land was still abundant and mostly unaccounted for), but yes, there are some reasoning flaws with this approach. (The other issue is with intellectual property rights — I don't think that IP should be treated the same way and on the same legal basis as physical property.) What do you find compelling in Rawls theory? He is considered the arch-villain in libertarian circles, but I can see some logic in his statements about inherent inequality. However, his solutions amount to lottery, and for me, lotteries are extremely unfair to begin with.
- bufordsharkley 10y ago
  > What do you find compelling in Rawls theory? He is considered the arch-villain in libertarian circles, but I can see some logic in his statements about inherent inequality. However, his solutions amount to lottery, and for me, lotteries are extremely unfair to begin with. I think the Veil of Ignorance is extremely compelling, and I think leads inextricably to equal rights for natural resources, open borders, etc. A lot of his reasoning I don't agree with-- he thinks all actors behind the Veil would perform minimax analyses, which is unjustified. However, I think the overall thought experiment is very valid. As for your disagreements with Rand-- is there anything you disagree with Georgism about?

atemerev 10y ago

This is one of the two issues where I am not in complete agreement with Ayn Rand's theory (she thought that first come/first served approach is OK with land grab and other natural resources like frequency bands; and free market should diffuse the resources to the most efficient actors if competition and trade are not restricted.) This sounds logical (land grabs were OK when land was still abundant and mostly unaccounted for), but yes, there are some reasoning flaws with this approach. (The other issue is with intellectual property rights — I don't think that IP should be treated the same way and on the same legal basis as physical property.) What do you find compelling in Rawls theory? He is considered the arch-villain in libertarian circles, but I can see some logic in his statements about inherent inequality. However, his solutions amount to lottery, and for me, lotteries are extremely unfair to begin with.

bufordsharkley 10y ago
> What do you find compelling in Rawls theory? He is considered the arch-villain in libertarian circles, but I can see some logic in his statements about inherent inequality. However, his solutions amount to lottery, and for me, lotteries are extremely unfair to begin with. I think the Veil of Ignorance is extremely compelling, and I think leads inextricably to equal rights for natural resources, open borders, etc. A lot of his reasoning I don't agree with-- he thinks all actors behind the Veil would perform minimax analyses, which is unjustified. However, I think the overall thought experiment is very valid. As for your disagreements with Rand-- is there anything you disagree with Georgism about?