Economics Questions

Re: Feudal Land Arrangements Under Anarcho Capitalism.

hayekianxyz — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 15:47:56 GMT

Daniel J. Sanchez:
People almost always split their legacies among their children unless the state prevents them from doing so. This is true even when the success of a monarchical dynasty depends on doing otherwise, like with the French Merovingian and Carolingian dynasties. Over generations this tendency necessarily breaks up large estates.

This has nothing to do with estates, this is a business enterprise. Unless you think malls will fail for the same reason?

Re: Feudal Land Arrangements Under Anarcho Capitalism.

Daniel J. Sanchez — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 15:35:56 GMT

GilesStratton:

Daniel J. Sanchez:

The centralization of ownership characteristic of feudalism is only sustainable with primogeniture, entail, and mortmain laws which are inherently antithetical to Lockean property rights, which are held by the individual and the living: not by the collective and the dead.

Wonderful, now, prove it. Juan seems to be unable to do so, perhaps you might?

People almost always split their legacies among their children unless the state prevents them from doing so. This is true even when the success of a monarchical dynasty depends on doing otherwise, like with the French Merovingian and Carolingian dynasties. Over generations this tendency necessarily breaks up large estates.

Re: Feudal Land Arrangements Under Anarcho Capitalism.

hayekianxyz — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 14:53:12 GMT

Jon Irenicus:
No, but that isn't what the quote was referring to anyway.

But that's what I'm referring to, in which case the quote was off topic and not relevant anyway.

Re: Feudal Land Arrangements Under Anarcho Capitalism.

hayekianxyz — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 14:53:08 GMT

Jon Irenicus:

No, but that isn't what the quote was referring to anyway.

But that's what I'm referring to, in which case the quote was off topic and not relevant anyway.

Re: Feudal Land Arrangements Under Anarcho Capitalism.

Jon Irenicus — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 14:43:58 GMT

No, but that isn't what the quote was referring to anyway.

Re: Feudal Land Arrangements Under Anarcho Capitalism.

hayekianxyz — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 14:40:36 GMT

Jon Irenicus:

Large-scale ownership without homesteading? It's not compatible with libertarianism, and as Hoppe and Mises note, is currently facilitated by the state and is not what they'd support in its absence.

Indirectly homesteaded in the sense of voluntary exchange. Is it that difficult to imagine corporations suited to this type of enterprise?

Re: Feudal Land Arrangements Under Anarcho Capitalism.

Jon Irenicus — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 14:32:29 GMT

Large-scale ownership without homesteading? It's not compatible with libertarianism, and as Hoppe and Mises note, is currently facilitated by the state and is not what they'd support in its absence.

Re: Feudal Land Arrangements Under Anarcho Capitalism.

hayekianxyz — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 14:23:33 GMT

Juan:
Here's an interesting note. It comes from Hoppe's Socialism & Capitalism :

Regarding large-scale ownership, in particular of land, Mises observes that it is normally only brought about and upheld by nonmarket forces: by coercive violence and a state-enforced legal system outlawing or hampering the selling of land. “Nowhere and at no time has the large scale ownership of land come into being through the working of economic forces in the market. Founded by violence, it has been upheld by violence and that alone. As soon as the latifundia are drawn into the sphere of market transactions they begin to crumble, until at last they disappear completely . . . . That in a market economy it is difficult even now to uphold the latifundia, is shown by the endeavors to create legislation institutions like the ‘Fideikommiss’ and related legal institutions such as the English ‘entail’ . . . . Never was the ownership of the means of production more closely concentrated than at the time of Pliny, when half the province of Africa was owned by six people, or in the day of the Merovingian, when the church possessed the greater part of all French soil. And in no part of the world is there less large-scale land ownership than in capitalist North America,” Socialism, Indianapolis, 1981, pp.325326.

So what? Previously it has been enforced by violence, so what? Malls manage to thrive without violence, there's no reason that communities wouldn't be able to do the same.

Re: Feudal Land Arrangements Under Anarcho Capitalism.

hayekianxyz — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 14:19:09 GMT

Daniel J. Sanchez:

The centralization of ownership characteristic of feudalism is only sustainable with primogeniture, entail, and mortmain laws which are inherently antithetical to Lockean property rights, which are held by the individual and the living: not by the collective and the dead.

Wonderful, now, prove it. Juan seems to be unable to do so, perhaps you might?

Re: Feudal Land Arrangements Under Anarcho Capitalism.

Daniel J. Sanchez — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 04:15:19 GMT

The centralization of ownership characteristic of feudalism is only sustainable with primogeniture, entail, and mortmain laws which are inherently antithetical to Lockean property rights, which are held by the individual and the living: not by the collective and the dead.

Re: Feudal Land Arrangements Under Anarcho Capitalism.

Juan — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 02:47:04 GMT

Here's an interesting note. It comes from Hoppe's Socialism & Capitalism :

Regarding large-scale ownership, in particular of land, Mises observes that it is normally only brought about and upheld by nonmarket forces: by coercive violence and a state-enforced legal system outlawing or hampering the selling of land. “Nowhere and at no time has the large scale ownership of land come into being through the working of economic forces in the market. Founded by violence, it has been upheld by violence and that alone. As soon as the latifundia are drawn into the sphere of market transactions they begin to crumble, until at last they disappear completely . . . . That in a market economy it is difficult even now to uphold the latifundia, is shown by the endeavors to create legislation institutions like the ‘Fideikommiss’ and related legal institutions such as the English ‘entail’ . . . . Never was the ownership of the means of production more closely concentrated than at the time of Pliny, when half the province of Africa was owned by six people, or in the day of the Merovingian, when the church possessed the greater part of all French soil. And in no part of the world is there less large-scale land ownership than in capitalist North America,” Socialism, Indianapolis, 1981, pp.325326.

Re: Feudal Land Arrangements Under Anarcho Capitalism.

hayekianxyz — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 02:36:13 GMT

Juan:
Why ? You are wrong and already showed it.

No, I haven't.

Re: Feudal Land Arrangements Under Anarcho Capitalism.

AndrewKemendo — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 02:29:33 GMT

GilesStratton:

Juan:
Go back and read previous posts -- I already addressed all your fallacies. Stop lying (to yourself).

Then it won't be a problem for you to do it again. Now, what are the incentives for people to own land?

Simple, Freedom. It ALWAYS goes back to this simple concept.

As a renter, I must sign a binding agreement. This implies that I agree and submit to said contract willingly and arguably happily. If instead I am the owner of said property, I have no one to contract with other than myself. Therefore the incentive, is to not have to agree to anyone elses rules - however lenient they may be.

Even if it was the best contract in the world, I personally and I think most others would rather OWN the land because at some time in the near or far future I may want to do something which, prior to signing the agreement I may have not wanted to do which was prohibited - as a random example: building a shooting range (which may interefere with contractual noise mitigation).

The entire idea of owning rather than renting is the idea of autonomy and independence. That is the incentive. That is what we are debating and writing about and fighting for. That is my incentive for life.

Re: Feudal Land Arrangements Under Anarcho Capitalism.

Juan — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 02:18:50 GMT

Why ? You are wrong and already showed it.

Re: Feudal Land Arrangements Under Anarcho Capitalism.

hayekianxyz — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 02:11:43 GMT

Juan:
There's no point in re-writing what I already wrote.

Find then stop boldly proclaiming victory.