>Murder-for-hire Not if a person's life is considered their property. If the concept of property is re-defined to include non-tangible concepts, like time, hea

>Murder-for-hire Not if a person's life is considered their property. If the concept of property is re-defined to include non-tangible concepts, like time, health, wellbeing, etc. then it probably defeats a lot of arguments against "we should only have property rights and not worker's rights" I'd like to know what fundamentally distinguishes property rights such that successful attempts to re-define them produces a significantly different outcome. If you look at who enforces property rights vs. who enforces workers rights, a re-definition of property would absolutely radical. Like, imagine if local cops had a framework for enforcing OSHA-style labor rules on the basis of worker injuries constituting a property rights violation of the employee. Imagine if your boss didn't pressure you to work overtime because it could result in them being arrested. Imagine if the time required for you to wait at the DMV was a potential violation of the 4th amendment. The world would be so different lol.