Land ownership debate

[Death Metal]

(And also moral by the non Agression principle.)

The, um, what? That anything like the Prime Directive?

Well, in the way adherents to it will gladly break it for short-term gain....

[Geilinor]

I was raised (and my property is located) in Iowa, the most productive farming region on earth. The average farm is no more than a few hundred acres and is operated by a family and 1-3 hired hands. The Tractor and Combine have eliminated the need for mass labor on Corn and Wheat farms.

So this mans property should be taken from him? He is somehow exploiting these men by paying them for their labor?

To make a profit the farm owner would have to be paying the workers less than the value of their labour, hence wage exploitation.

Wouldn't a collectively-owned farm still need to make a profit? Let's say that the population grows and there are more mouths to feed. How will that farm obtain the additional land it needs?

[North Yakistan]

Having visited countries that don't have effective government supervision of the food and drug industries nor obvious interest in reducing pollution (eg, China) I must point out that the facts are otherwise. I prefer to be able to eat, drink, take meds, and breathe the air without constant worries that it might kill me. There are obvious problems with many sorts of government interventions, but I'll gladly pick and choose the ones I like.

Agreed. There are bad regulations, but also a lot of beneficial ones. Having to play Russian Roulette with my milk is something I'd rather not do, for one.

But if a farmer is selling unsafe milk people will tell eachother the milk is unsafe (Mass media is great for consumers) and stop buying from that farmer. Because the market demands safe milk he must produce a better product or go out of bussines.

[Llamalandia]

I was raised (and my property is located) in Iowa, the most productive farming region on earth. The average farm is no more than a few hundred acres and is operated by a family and 1-3 hired hands. The Tractor and Combine have eliminated the need for mass labor on Corn and Wheat farms.

So this mans property should be taken from him? He is somehow exploiting these men by paying them for their labor?

To make a profit the farm owner would have to be paying the workers less than the value of their labour, hence wage exploitation. The property should be commonly owned by the community, the man would have the opportunity to work on the land since he would be part of the community. And obviously the goods wouldn't be sold for profit, since generalized commodity production wouldn't exist.

Ah hah, I see your problem, your not operating a free market environment. In a free market the price of labor just like the price of goods is determined by supply and demand. Thus if the demand for agricultural products causes their price to exceed the price of labor (say that unemployment is at record levels) as determined by the labor supply, then by all rights the land owner should be allowed to pocket the difference (ie profit).

[Geilinor]

Agreed. There are bad regulations, but also a lot of beneficial ones. Having to play Russian Roulette with my milk is something I'd rather not do, for one.

But if a farmer is selling unsafe milk people will tell eachother the milk is unsafe (Mass media is great for consumers) and stop buying from that farmer. Because the market demands safe milk he must produce a better product or go out of bussines.

People won't know the milk is unsafe until someone drinks it and becomes sick. It's better for someone (the government) to know that the milk is being produced safely beforehand.

[Death Metal]

To make a profit the farm owner would have to be paying the workers less than the value of their labour, hence wage exploitation.

Wouldn't a collectively-owned farm still need to make a profit? Let's say that the population grows and there are more mouths to feed. How will that farm obtain the additional land it needs?

Or similarily, require an excess cache of food and commodities in case of catastrophe. Not to mention maintenance...

[North Yakistan]

The, um, what? That anything like the Prime Directive?

Well, in the way adherents to it will gladly break it for short-term gain....

I don't.

The non Agression principal states "though shalt not initiate the use of force". That's why AnCaps consider taxes theft. If you dont pay your thrown in jail.

[Death Metal]

Well, in the way adherents to it will gladly break it for short-term gain....

The non Agression principal states "though shalt not initiate the use of force".

But the only way to prevent the use of force is to use force.

Also, taxes are rent, but that's nothing to do with the topic.

[Llamalandia]

Value is subjective. The value of the labor is different to the farmer than it is to the worker.

If the worker believes his time is worth 15$ a hour and the farmer believes his labor is worth 10$, they negotiate untill an agreement is reached on the value of the labor. If the labor required for the job is scarce (maybe it requires special skills) it will be more difficult to find someone to preform it and the farmer will pay more. Labor is a commodity like everything else.

The worker did not provide the land, the seeds, the equipment, he is selling his labor to the farmer in exchange for agreed apon compensation. It is mutually beneficial trade.

It's not that all value comes from the labour, it's that the surplus value comes from the labour, that's what is exploited and extracted.

Not all surplus value does come from labor though some surplus value comes from capital, ie land, equipment training etc. Hence as the owner of the land and equipment he the owner is entitled to the profits.

[Dejanic]

To make a profit the farm owner would have to be paying the workers less than the value of their labour, hence wage exploitation.

Wouldn't a collectively-owned farm still need to make a profit? Let's say that the population grows and there are more mouths to feed. How will that farm obtain the additional land it needs?

I'm not advocating Market Socialism, so their wouldn't be profits. The farm would expand or surplus food would be transported from another communal farm (obviously there would be large communication links available, and all of the farms would probably be part of some kind of regional federation).

Though overpopulation is going to be a problem no matter what system we live under, Communism would just try and distribute goods based on needs not profit.

[North Yakistan]

The non Agression principal states "though shalt not initiate the use of force".

But the only way to prevent the use of force is to use force.

Also, taxes are rent, but that's nothing to do with the topic.

How so?

And is my body the property of the state? I own myself not the government. If I come to your house and demand you pay me 100$ a month in rent or I will lock you in a cage how is that acceptable?

[Geilinor]

But the only way to prevent the use of force is to use force.

Also, taxes are rent, but that's nothing to do with the topic.

How so?

And is my body the property of the state? I own myself not the government. If I come to your house and demand you pay me 100$ a month in rent or I will lock you in a cage how is that acceptable?

You aren't providing me with any services for that money.

[Death Metal]

But the only way to prevent the use of force is to use force.

Also, taxes are rent, but that's nothing to do with the topic.

How so?

Threats of immediate consequences are coercive forces. Just because a use of force is beneficial does not make it not a use of force.

Also, you pay rent for access and use of public services. It's no different from living in an apartment. Being anti-tax is the same as being anti-capitalist in the end; why do you get to refuse to pay for services provided for you after they've already been provided?

[North Yakistan]

Wouldn't a collectively-owned farm still need to make a profit? Let's say that the population grows and there are more mouths to feed. How will that farm obtain the additional land it needs?

I'm not advocating Market Socialism, so their wouldn't be profits. The farm would expand or surplus food would be transported from another communal farm (obviously there would be large communication links available, and all of the farms would probably be part of some kind of regional federation).

Though overpopulation is going to be a problem no matter what system we live under, Communism would just try and distribute goods based on needs not profit.

Question, so lets say by some means or another your system comes about. I don't want to live like that, are you going to take my land to ad to a communal farm? Or can I live on it myself free of interference? Can I trade my surplus product with Communes for things I cannot produce?

[Llamalandia]

Wouldn't a collectively-owned farm still need to make a profit? Let's say that the population grows and there are more mouths to feed. How will that farm obtain the additional land it needs?

I'm not advocating Market Socialism, so their wouldn't be profits. The farm would expand or surplus food would be transported from another communal farm (obviously there would be large communication links available, and all of the farms would probably be part of some kind of regional federation).

Though overpopulation is going to be a problem no matter what system we live under, Communism would just try and distribute goods based on needs not profit.

Yeah, that would be called central planning and it tends not to work out very well. They tried it in the USSR didn't go so well. Markets remain the best ways to signal the distribution of goods based on wants and needs.

[European Socialist Republic]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Azc2mcIiZUM

Sound the blast for freedom, boys, and send it far and wide,
March along to victory, for God is on our side,
While the voice of nature thunders o'er the rising tide:
"God made the land for the people".

Chorus
The land, the land,
'twas God who made the land,
The land, the land,
The ground on which we stand,
Why should we be beggars
With the ballot in our hand?
God gave the land to the people.

Hark! The shout is swelling from the east and from the west!
Why should we beg work and let the landlords take the best?
Make them pay their taxes for the land, we'll risk the rest!
The land was meant for the people.

Chorus

The banner has been raised on high to face the battle din,
The army now is marching on, the struggle to begin,
We'll never cease our efforts 'til the victory we win,
And the land is free for the people.

Chorus

Clear the way for liberty, the land must all be free,
Britons will not falter in the fight tho' stern it be.
'Til the flag we love so well shall wave from sea to sea,
O'er the land that's free for the people.

Chorus

[Dejanic]

I'm not advocating Market Socialism, so their wouldn't be profits. The farm would expand or surplus food would be transported from another communal farm (obviously there would be large communication links available, and all of the farms would probably be part of some kind of regional federation).

Though overpopulation is going to be a problem no matter what system we live under, Communism would just try and distribute goods based on needs not profit.

Question, so lets say by some means or another your system comes about. I don't want to live like that, are you going to take my land to ad to a communal farm? Or can I live on it myself free of interference? Can I trade my surplus product with Communes for things I cannot produce?

If you and a group of people wanted to run away somewhere remote and play Capitalist I couldn't care less, obviously if their was 4 of you and you claimed 1000 acres of farmable land right next to a large Commune then their would probably be a problem, but other than that I couldn't really care.

[North Yakistan]

How so?

Threats of immediate consequences are coercive forces. Just because a use of force is beneficial does not make it not a use of force.

Also, you pay rent for access and use of public services. It's no different from living in an apartment. Being anti-tax is the same as being anti-capitalist in the end; why do you get to refuse to pay for services provided for you after they've already been provided?

I'm still not following. "Steal from me and I shoot you" is not the same as "pay your taxes or off to jail with you"

So if I go to my property and live entirely off the grid like a mountain man I don't need to pay taxes? Cause that's not how it works here. I would certainly cut ties to public services in exchange for no longe paying taxes.

[Dejanic]

I'm not advocating Market Socialism, so their wouldn't be profits. The farm would expand or surplus food would be transported from another communal farm (obviously there would be large communication links available, and all of the farms would probably be part of some kind of regional federation).

Though overpopulation is going to be a problem no matter what system we live under, Communism would just try and distribute goods based on needs not profit.

Yeah, that would be called central planning and it tends not to work out very well. They tried it in the USSR didn't go so well. Markets remain the best ways to signal the distribution of goods based on wants and needs.

I don't advocate central planning, I've never advocated central planning.

[Death Metal]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Azc2mcIiZUM

Sound the blast for freedom, boys, and send it far and wide,
March along to victory, for God is on our side,
While the voice of nature thunders o'er the rising tide:
"God made the land for the people".

Chorus
The land, the land,
'twas God who made the land,
The land, the land,
The ground on which we stand,
Why should we be beggars
With the ballot in our hand?
God gave the land to the people.

Hark! The shout is swelling from the east and from the west!
Why should we beg work and let the landlords take the best?
Make them pay their taxes for the land, we'll risk the rest!
The land was meant for the people.

Chorus

The banner has been raised on high to face the battle din,
The army now is marching on, the struggle to begin,
We'll never cease our efforts 'til the victory we win,
And the land is free for the people.

Chorus

Clear the way for liberty, the land must all be free,
Britons will not falter in the fight tho' stern it be.
'Til the flag we love so well shall wave from sea to sea,
O'er the land that's free for the people.

Chorus

Nice unsourced claim.

[Llamalandia]

How so?

Threats of immediate consequences are coercive forces. Just because a use of force is beneficial does not make it not a use of force.

Also, you pay rent for access and use of public services. It's no different from living in an apartment. Being anti-tax is the same as being anti-capitalist in the end; why do you get to refuse to pay for services provided for you after they've already been provided?

Well, that would be true if there was competition in the taxation sector. Unfortunately, government kinda has a monopoly on that specific business venture there. So, perhaps being anti-tax could following your line of reasoning be considered anti-laizze faire, but I think suggesting it to be anticapitalist is a bit of a stretch at least in terms of free enterprise capitalism.

[Geilinor]

Question, so lets say by some means or another your system comes about. I don't want to live like that, are you going to take my land to ad to a communal farm? Or can I live on it myself free of interference? Can I trade my surplus product with Communes for things I cannot produce?

If you and a group of people wanted to run away somewhere remote and play Capitalist I couldn't care less, obviously if their was 4 of you and you claimed 1000 acres of farmable land right next to a large Commune then their would probably be a problem, but other than that I couldn't really care.

Why would that be a problem? Can your commune not keep up with the competition?

[North Yakistan]

Question, so lets say by some means or another your system comes about. I don't want to live like that, are you going to take my land to ad to a communal farm? Or can I live on it myself free of interference? Can I trade my surplus product with Communes for things I cannot produce?

If you and a group of people wanted to run away somewhere remote and play Capitalist I couldn't care less, obviously if their was 4 of you and you claimed 1000 acres of farmable land right next to a large Commune then their would probably be a problem, but other than that I couldn't really care.

So your an anarcho-capitolist. In my ideal system your free to commune up all you want so long as you don't force others to do it or steal the property of others to support your commune.

And I agree, you can't just claim land, you must mix your labor with it. Homesteading.

[European Socialist Republic]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Azc2mcIiZUM

Sound the blast for freedom, boys, and send it far and wide,
March along to victory, for God is on our side,
While the voice of nature thunders o'er the rising tide:
"God made the land for the people".

Chorus
The land, the land,
'twas God who made the land,
The land, the land,
The ground on which we stand,
Why should we be beggars
With the ballot in our hand?
God gave the land to the people.

Hark! The shout is swelling from the east and from the west!
Why should we beg work and let the landlords take the best?
Make them pay their taxes for the land, we'll risk the rest!
The land was meant for the people.

Chorus

The banner has been raised on high to face the battle din,
The army now is marching on, the struggle to begin,
We'll never cease our efforts 'til the victory we win,
And the land is free for the people.

Chorus

Clear the way for liberty, the land must all be free,
Britons will not falter in the fight tho' stern it be.
'Til the flag we love so well shall wave from sea to sea,
O'er the land that's free for the people.

Chorus

Nice unsourced claim.

Thank you.

[Llamalandia]

Threats of immediate consequences are coercive forces. Just because a use of force is beneficial does not make it not a use of force.

Also, you pay rent for access and use of public services. It's no different from living in an apartment. Being anti-tax is the same as being anti-capitalist in the end; why do you get to refuse to pay for services provided for you after they've already been provided?

I'm still not following. "Steal from me and I shoot you" is not the same as "pay your taxes or off to jail with you"


So if I go to my property and live entirely off the grid like a mountain man I don't need to pay taxes? Cause that's not how it works here. I would certainly cut ties to public services in exchange for no longe paying taxes.

Umm property tax yes, income tax no. (provided you have no or very little monetary income). Food produced and consumed on farms or for the purpose of subsistence is exempt from income taxation if I recall correctly.