Rent-over-own actually applies to capital too. Think about bitcoin mining contracts or timeshare vacation homes. The defining characteristic of “owning” capital is participating in the risk of catastrophic loss, not physical possession or operational control.
-
-
Even a scheme as elemental as say land titles in a purely Georgist/LVT regime is not a pristine embodiment of “ownership”. You can bolt creative rent-like schemes on top of it.
Show this thread -
At the other limit, “public” ownership of a commons is not a necessary relationship with an asset but a set of mutual expectations among humans about human behavior in relation to that asset. You don’t sue squirrels for trespassing on “your” land for example.
Show this thread -
As a commenter points out, rent-over-own really only works for standardized things. This is actually the risk point in disguise. For standardized things there is no information asymmetry that can be exploited *at that level* to informationally distinguish renter and owner
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.