Ariadne's Thread on Property
Replies
Next speaker on the main path
Dee
(main path)
Next speaker on the main path
Source
Document






On Property

(Click here to continue on the main path)
 Ann Speaking

Current speaker I tend to agree with Vera about the state of nature as well as contractarian arguments. I'm not sure what the value of such arguments is.

Our job is to think about what rules of property should be in place in our society with our history. It seems to me that we have to look at consequences -- which is exactly what Dee, like most libertarians, doesn't want to do.

It seems to me that here and now in our society there are some advantages to having some fairly strong individual property rights. For example:

  • Private property can prevent many conflicts. Lots of writers have pointed this out. David Hume was one.
  • The incentives in a properly devised regime of private ownership will encourage greater productivity, creativity, and hard work.
  • Private ownership can provide one basis for individual liberty.

  • As a result of these advantages, the vast majority of people are better off under a properly devised regime of private ownership than in the state of nature or under a system of collective control of property.
Notice that I keep referring to a "properly devised regime of private ownership." I do not concede that the system of extensive property rights that Dee advocates would maximize the welfare of the vast majority. But as a utilitarian, that's exactly what I want to see happen. It may take a lot of regulation and taxation to make sure that it does.

I would also like to make one more point. I do not see how any institution other than government can devise and enforce a regime of private ownership that maximizes human welfare. Here I agree with John. Modern property is a creation of legitimate government.
Ariadne's Home Contact Ariadne at: Property Home
Property Bibliography Property Contents