Collective vs. Private Ownership (Part 2 of a Series)

[CCTelander]

An excellent article by Larken Rose about property rights and how they work in real life.

Collective vs. Private Ownership (Part 2 of a Series)

One of the most fundamental differences between capitalism and communism is the difference between “collective ownership” versus “private ownership.” The question boils down to whether individuals should own things, or whether everyone should jointly own things. However, even that question is based on a basic misunderstanding.

To “own” something means to have the exclusive right to decide what is done with that thing. If I “own” a sandwich, if it is mine, then I can choose to eat it, save it for later, give it away, trade it for something else (if someone else wants to trade), feed it to pigeons, throw it in the mud, etc. It’s my choice, and my choice alone. No one else has the right to do any of those things to my sandwich without my permission. That is what it means to own something. The concept is pretty simple.

However, applying that definition to “collective ownership” immediately makes a mess, both conceptually and in practical terms. If ten people claim to “collectively” own a sandwich, what would that even mean? Ten individuals obviously cannot each have the exclusive right to decide what is done with the sandwich. And if the ten people vote on what to do with it, whoever loses the vote doesn’t share in the “ownership” at all. And if the sandwich is cut into ten pieces, and a piece given to each person, then none of them owns the whole sandwich, and then it turns into individual ownership of each piece...

Read the rest here:

https://steemit.com/economics/@larke...-2-of-a-series

[CCTelander]

bump

[CCTelander]

A bit more:

Even in the simplest scenario, if two people both want one thing, and want that one thing used for different purposes, then there is a conflict. It doesn’t even make sense to say that they both “own” it, since that would mean that each of them has an exclusive right to decide what happens to the thing. If they happen to come to an agreement, that’s fine, but if either of them needs the permission of the other do use the thing, then neither of them really “owns” it. So really, the term “collective ownership”—or even “joint ownership” (with just two people)—doesn’t make any sense.