3 ms·

You mean on real property or on gov't invented property created through government "interference" and "regulation" over free markets? I don't see how having go

You mean on real property or on gov't invented property created through government "interference" and "regulation" over free markets? I don't see how having gov't create a right around "patents" (non-tangible "property") is any different than any other gov't regulation that libertarians rail against. (Taxes? Those are just GP "government property".)

mikeyouse 13y ago
So there is no such thing as intellectual property? If Pfizer spends $10B over two decades to develop a drug, JohnDoe Co. can recreate it on day-1 in the market and compete against Pfizer without penalty? Do people really want to live in that world?
- darkarmani 13y ago
  There is no such thing as IP until created by what people in other instances would call "gov't interference." I understand the trade-offs involved and I'm not actually arguing for no IP, but more about the fact that it is held sacred, but any time the gov't does anything else that is "bad."
dragonwriter 13y ago
> You mean on real property or on gov't invented property created through government "interference" and "regulation" over free markets? By "real property" are you referring to government-created exclusive rights over land (which is what the term actually means), or are you referring to government-created exclusive rights over tangible portable assets (which is "tangible personal property" rather than "real property", but frequently mistakenly referred to as "real property" by the kind of people that criticize "imaginary property"), and, in either case, how are these government-created exclusive rights different meaningfully different than government "interference" and "regulation" over "free markets"?
- darkarmani 13y ago
  I meant both. Land, improvements on the land, and any affixed items and also the opposite of fake. I don't think those gov't created rights are any different than any other gov't regulation, which is why i put it in scare quotes. People worship those property rights created and enforced by the gov't, but call the same amount of "interference" in other areas as regulation.

mikeyouse 13y ago

So there is no such thing as intellectual property? If Pfizer spends $10B over two decades to develop a drug, JohnDoe Co. can recreate it on day-1 in the market and compete against Pfizer without penalty? Do people really want to live in that world?

darkarmani 13y ago
There is no such thing as IP until created by what people in other instances would call "gov't interference." I understand the trade-offs involved and I'm not actually arguing for no IP, but more about the fact that it is held sacred, but any time the gov't does anything else that is "bad."

dragonwriter 13y ago

> You mean on real property or on gov't invented property created through government "interference" and "regulation" over free markets? By "real property" are you referring to government-created exclusive rights over land (which is what the term actually means), or are you referring to government-created exclusive rights over tangible portable assets (which is "tangible personal property" rather than "real property", but frequently mistakenly referred to as "real property" by the kind of people that criticize "imaginary property"), and, in either case, how are these government-created exclusive rights different meaningfully different than government "interference" and "regulation" over "free markets"?

darkarmani 13y ago
I meant both. Land, improvements on the land, and any affixed items and also the opposite of fake. I don't think those gov't created rights are any different than any other gov't regulation, which is why i put it in scare quotes. People worship those property rights created and enforced by the gov't, but call the same amount of "interference" in other areas as regulation.