>In practice, that would be a world without cars and computers. I'd gladly trade my computer and phone for a world without private property. > not even a dece

>In practice, that would be a world without cars and computers. I'd gladly trade my computer and phone for a world without private property. > not even a decent suburban home. I'm not going to build anything but what I absolutely need, because I can lose it. Maybe if what you built actually contibuted to your community, the community would protect your contributions. >And I can't get a loan on it, either. This matters. There is no money to loan to anyone without private property. I don't think this matters in a state of nature. >So your position makes a nice soundbite, but it doesn't actually work very well in the real world. This "real world" you speak of isn't working either. Climate change, arguably the worst unintended consequence of private property, is going to end our civilization in the next century. I only say it's the worst, since slavery only really effects humans, climate change impacts all species, not just one race. Too bad it's our children and grandchildren that are the ones that will realize how selfish we are being.