Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let's assume we live in a complete libertarian society. The property right is upheld; there's no corporate or person income, property or estate tax; the government is minimized to national defense and law enforcement.
Since certain people, like Warren Buffett, and certain companies, like Apple or Google, are good at accumulating wealth, they would be able to buy as much land as possible.
Now what? They'd own let's say 50% of America. Now, everybody who wants to live on their land must comply to their rules:
1. No freedom of speech - remember the Google Manifesto?
2. No firearm ownership - virtually all companies ban firearms on their properties.
3. No health food - hey, Buffett loves French fries.
4. No free competition - it's their land, remember? Comcrapst is all you get.
5. No right wing white people are allowed.
Since the lands are owned by the private entities, It's their land and their rules, right?
Please do not comment if you aren't leaning towards the libertarianism.
You mean they boght property outside of America. Because they own property in America you think they can take rights away? lol
Another product of Americas Dept of Education on display.
First of all I am baffled with some leftist posters and their obsession with attacking libertarians when we were just a blip in the 2016 elections and have zero representation in Washington. Is there some great threat the libertarians pose to liberals that I am missing?
On to your question. If the US eliminated corporation taxation there would be a flood of international corporations moving here. The ripple effect on our economy would be enormous and boost every American's standard of living through the roof. On top of that competition in the corporate world would make monopolies here impossible to happen. So Google and Apple taking all the land is a joke, would not happen.
But say they tried to do that anyways. Part of the libertarian philosophy is a small federal government. Meaning the state and local governments by comparison would be more important. Voters could decide on a state or local level what is ok. In a libertarian world Google would not be able to stop Americans carrying guns anywhere they want or thinking any way they want. They would be infringing on my civil liberties and would be unconstitutional. Property rights would not squash civil liberties.
Nice try.
You know what I find baffling? Calling someone a leftist becasue they disagree with you.
I've never had an interaction with the OP that even remotely lends itself to him or her being a leftist. But they said something you don't like. So... leftists.
You mean they boght property outside of America. Because they own property in America you think they can take rights away? lol
Another product of Americas Dept of Education on display.
They can take rights away if you agree to it.
If I buy a plot of land, and rent it out, I can easily make rules that you have to follow on my property. Barring local level laws that prevent this, I could legally put in your lease that you cannot own or possess a firearm on my property.
The caveat is of course that my taking away your rights isn't by force. I'd offer my space for your to rent and you can choose to agree to my terms. The problem does get more complex if I own 75% of all rental properties in town, more similar to the OP's scenario.
If I buy a plot of land, and rent it out, I can easily make rules that you have to follow on my property. Barring local level laws that prevent this, I could legally put in your lease that you cannot own or possess a firearm on my property.
The caveat is of course that my taking away your rights isn't by force. I'd offer my space for your to rent and you can choose to agree to my terms. The problem does get more complex if I own 75% of all rental properties in town, more similar to the OP's scenario.
Exactly my point. Eventually, each town or city would be owned by some landlords or big corporations who then set their own rules for anybody who wish to enter.
If I buy a plot of land, and rent it out, I can easily make rules that you have to follow on my property. Barring local level laws that prevent this, I could legally put in your lease that you cannot own or possess a firearm on my property.
States have laws on the books preventing that. The land owner isn't the law. The state is. Some states do not have that law on the books. Probably because no one challenged it yet. Look what happened to DC when the gun laws were challenged. DC lost.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDusty
The caveat is of course that my taking away your rights isn't by force. I'd offer my space for your to rent and you can choose to agree to my terms. The problem does get more complex if I own 75% of all rental properties in town, more similar to the OP's scenario.
So you own 75% of the rental properties. How many are leased? I'm guessing not many. That you think someone could own a huge amount of land, deny rights, and have plenty of people living at that location shows how off base the premise is. Who is going to live there? Who is going to setup a business there? Maybe a tiny village that might work at first. Then after enough get robbed, and they will, the people will move and you'll have a ghost town.
Don't give him hints. It's up to these folks to learn to think for themselves.
Fallacious arguments do not make for good arguments. The arguments here boil down to made up situations they are not going to happen and then expecting people to defend them when there is nothing to defend.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.