29/ It offends the same kind of people who get itchy re fiat currency or the "time debt transformation" where - as the objection says - banks pretend that money loaned out for 20 years is still usable now.
-
Show this thread
-
30/ On a tangent, this allergy to complexity is a thing, where people can't abstract away from the concrete to truly understand things. As they say in coding: there are two types of people: those who understand pointers and those who can't.
2 replies 0 retweets 15 likesShow this thread -
31/ ...but getting back to the core thing of "full and complete rights to land is the natural and normal and correct way to own land": no, that's not actually traditionally how land has EVER worked. That's a false retro-history. Land has ALWAYS been complicated.
3 replies 1 retweet 12 likesShow this thread -
32/ Perhaps never more complicated than in Medieval Europe. It was exceedingly rare for a man to own 20 acres, everything on those 20 acres, and nothing off those 20 acres. Instead, the norm was overlapping sets of claims. One family's land might include:
1 reply 0 retweets 12 likesShow this thread -
33/ - These 20 acres - and also a seasonal right to pick berries on the adjacent 5 acres ... but not more than 1 bushel per member of family - one share in the fish harvested from the stream - firewood from the adjacent forest, but only 1 cord per year
2 replies 0 retweets 15 likesShow this thread -
34/ ...but the right to the 20 acres is complicated by the fact that of every 20 bushels of wheat harvested from it, 2 bushels must go to support the local convent, and 1 bushel to the poor house
1 reply 0 retweets 14 likesShow this thread -
35/ ...and speaking of the poor, the widows of the town have the right to glean the fields after harvest, so while I can grow wheat on my land, and harvest it, I can't do TOO GOOD A JOB at harvesting it
1 reply 0 retweets 20 likesShow this thread -
36/ Also, as the land fronts the road, there is a levy where 5 days of labor per year must be spent maintaining the road. Additionally, attached to the land is the right to have a market stall thrive per year in the local village...but the stall can't be more than 10' tall
1 reply 0 retweets 12 likesShow this thread -
37/ ...lest it cast shadow on the adjacent stalls. Guys, ROMAN CITIES has zoning laws, specifying maximum heights, limitations on use, etc. If you object to zoning setbacks as a 20th century prog innovation ... you're not nearly as "trad" as you think you are.
9 replies 1 retweet 25 likesShow this thread -
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs Retweeted
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs added,
This Tweet is unavailable.2 replies 0 retweets 19 likesShow this thread
39/ sure, sure, you can have an ideal where all rights are bundled together and not unbundled ... but that implicitly depends on either people choosing the way you want them to, or forbidding trade. Which is bad. Trade increases utility.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.