(Click here to continue on the main path)

You people all know that I'm a utilitarian. I know there are problems with utilitarianism, but I think there are problems with all of the alternatives too. There are problems with theories of natural right and with all this talk about hypothetical contracts and initial situations.

Vera may be right that we don't really know what "rational parties" in various "initial situations" would do. I say that with all due respect to Rawls and Gauthier.

The principle of utility tells us that we ought to adopt social institutions that will maximize human welfare. Now maybe we should qualify that principle in various ways. Perhaps we should maximize average welfare. And perhaps we should add some constraints on the distribution of welfare and some rules that would prevent exploitation. I'm not sure.

But my point is that the rules of property should be adopted based on their consequences for human welfare. If we accept that, we are going to end up with a system that includes both state property and regulated private property. And the regulations on private property are going to change over time as circumstances, knowledge, and values change.