Re: Economic Rent As Sum of Externalities

On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 06:54:33 -0700, The Trucker in sci.econ
confessed to the world saying:
"jmh" <jmhall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:slrnf6ecom.bbo.jmhall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 00:37:07 GMT, royls@xxxxxxxxx in sci.econ
confessed to the world saying:

No, that is _not_ the issue here. The issue would be the same even
had Smith never existed. You don't seem to understand that it is a
scientific issue, not a mere matter of exegetical scholarship.

What "scientific issue"? The question of material existance
of the external world is not in questions here.

The question of man having created that external world is
also not is question here.

The only question here is whether or not man can individually
own some of that external world and then allow other's to
use it for the owner's gain. This is NOT a scientific
issue outside the question of "Is that happening now or
not?" Since that's NOT the question here your "scientific
issue" is a red herring.


I think you are asking all the wrong questions. The answers to
the questions you pose are readily apparent. As RoyL might
say "A matter of objective reality". But what about the question
of whether or not privatization of natural resources is a "good"
thing? That puts us on the spot because it insists that we reveal

Yes, the "can" should have been "may" or "should
we allow..."

our social priorities, i.e. we must define "good"; we must define
where we THINK we are going. Different people working
toward different conceptualizations of "good" cannot possibly
agree on the political economy that would be "best". I want
equality of rights and, as much as possible, equality of
opportunity as an end in itself. I do not propose that this will
make people "better" or worse or that it will take them closer
to some concept of God, or that it will tend to create a race
of Gods or demons. Somehow I think the land ownership people
have a different idea of "good" and that this is the _real_
problem. I am not a big fan of Ayn Rand, but she is quoted as
saying something to which I most heartily subscribe:
"If a person or group or culture or creed wishes to believe that
an afterlife will offer eternal rewards that are proportional to one's
Earthly poverty, sickness, disfigurement, ignorance, and brevity
of life, then a system of rules promoting Earthly prosperity, health,
and longevity would be inappropriate. If, however, one seeks
rules that are likely to optimize or maximize 'life on Earth,' these
rules must at least be consistent with, or respect, the natures of
'life' and 'Earth'." --- Ayn Rand

So let's have it. What is your idea of "good" and how does your
economic ideal play toward that "good"? I can't imagine why
someone would _want_ privatization (in perpetuity) of any natural
resource. Perhaps that might be a more fruitful discussion. Is
private ownership of land somehow GOOD for the individuals of
a society or for the society as a whole?

First off, you ideal that natural resources will not
be privatized in perpetuity is much more image than reality.
Those special interests within society that currently have
such disproportionate influence within govvernment as well
as the politicians will effectively be the private owners.

I don't buy the argument that govemrnet colletion of the
rent will be done well. The most dangerous aspect I see is
that the intra-socail weath transfers that occur in market
transactions will shift to political transfers. The result
will be that the transfers will be less transparent, larger,
more costly to produce and taken from a smaller pie.

I'm not convenced that the LTV works that well for the
type of large scale production inherent in the modern
world. Prvate ownership imparts a certain consistency
or certainty for planning that is not present in the
suggested approach.

Technological advancement and dispursed ownership of land
should drive whatever rent the land owner gets to a minimum
within the society. I'm not convincent those same dynamics
apply when land is centrally owned -- and lets not fool ourselves,
we're not talking aboe everyone owning the land but about
government owning the land. Theoretically that's not suppose
to matter in our society we in reality it most certainly does.

Today individuals are largely free from the bondage of
land. Creating what I see as something that will just
develop into the Feudal State (it almost is already)
will only serve to make us all surfs once again.

The social evolutionary porcesses has done a great job
of eliminating bad social structures and allowing the
beneficial ones to flurish. If private land ownership is
as bad as claimed, let it live and then die it's natual
life with the replacement to the current function it
provides within an economy and society as that better
institutional framework emerges. That framework is not
government.

jmh
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Relative Appropriation of Economic Rents
    ... unavoidably follows that private ownership of land ... believe in communal ownership or rights to land. ... of it to the community and then thrown in some rules defining its ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Relative Appropriation of Economic Rents
    ... them, the Georgists are the thieves, not the land owners. ... believe in private ownership or public ownership of the asset in ... That is the difference between a public beach and a private beach. ... The community does not rightly own ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Boston Legal vents against "the System" - NOT
    ... "COMMUNISM - the ownership of property, or means of production, ... that private ownership is referring to "private property"? ... Most Americans are led to believe that all land is "real estate". ...
    (rec.arts.tv)
  • Re: Relative Appropriation of Economic Rents
    ... communal ownership of land true enough, ... I do not consider private property of land to be theft. ... then the government (thus community) ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: You "own" your RV site? Really?
    ... The issue of ownership of land strikes to the very core of human ... Ownership has never been absolute. ... Regulations are a part of living in a society. ...
    (rec.outdoors.rv-travel)