TuringAI Posted April 29, 2008 Report Share Posted April 29, 2008 (edited) It is a meaningless excuse to support the arbitrary theft of some goods while keeping property of other goods. (Read 'goods' to be 'goods and services' or 'products' or 'utilization of entities' if you do not want to discriminate based on form.) The source of this quote is in an essay, which itself is referenced here, at http://www.suite101.com/discussion.cfm/libertarian/100463 where Franc and Star are arguing the merits of various kinds of RoIs. RoIs being Representations of Ideas. How does this apply to the relation between non-manufactured representations of ideas and manufactured representations of ideas? Does the mere fact that something is manufactured as opposed to non-manufactured turn it from non-property to property? If so, then why can we own crude oil, and not just be limited to refined oil in the form of gasoline? Why can we own land, and not just the house or farm built upon it? Edited April 29, 2008 by TuringAI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.