Land Grabs And Squatters

[PhilipDT]

So we re in a world of integration, thinking of a country isolated is a 19th century idea.

Yes unfortunately we don't collect world wide taxes. That makes providing worldwide services is kind of hard. Which is why countries collect taxes from their residents and provide services to the same.

Good job not answering my questions though.

 

[Matiasba]

This is another one in that divide that Dirtboy was talking about. In the US we don't grow up with the idea that the state is responsible for giving us a job. I've heard that here quite a bit - seems to be a popular view. I mean don't me wrong - in the US the state likes to say it's "creating jobs" with its policies, which is another can of worms, but it is more in the light of creating the best possible conditions for jobs to emerge in the economy, not that the state directly owes each and every person a job. All this redistribution of wealth mentality creates a disincentive for entrepreneurs along with all the other strange policies like closing the borders against, trade, products and resources that would help things along.

I was watching a Dan Kennedy video recently, and it was sparking some interesting questions about the general attitude of abundance and scarcity mentalities, and how that plays into the idea that wealth must be equally distributed. It's a fascinating topic because there is a point at which something is more like a natural resource in a passive state - like oil in the ground, a tree in a forest, etc, and at some point, people put their work, creativity, ingenuity, etc into creating something. The new thing has value which comes from the wellspring of people's minds, but the difficulty comes from how do we share those natural resources, and how do we share the ideas which transform them, i.e., is the intellectual property best patented and hoarded, or open source - something owned by humanity? The work we do is easier to see that it should be rewarded directly. But even though I do believe in property rights, I do really wonder what is so fair about people owning and inheriting vast resources such as land, minerals, water, petroleum, etc, as well as ideas such as advances in medicine, etc etc. It's quite a challenge, and to my mind the root of the divide is really there, not on the surface ideas we're debating. I think those who want to redistribute wealth feel the unfairness bubbling up from these deeper issues about how does a baby born to a rich family owning vast oilfields or in a country that does, have more rights to basic human needs than one born in a fly infested desert region of a country with no diamonds, oil, wealth, or technology or even arable farmland to subsist upon? We can all be free and equal in our rights to pursue happiness, but at what point do the prohibitive unequal conditions make that virtually impossible?

It is very interesting what you say. Unfortunately, concentration of resources (natural, human, etc) is something sad, but very real. With science for instance, we have all the scientists working for the labs, not for their own, so if theres a cure for aids lets say, is the laboratory who wins, and not the scientist. So they have the property of everything the scientist make. Thats why state is so needed -because we need someone to act in the behalf of the common citizen. Make that medicine accesible or free or whatever.
Unfortunately the state is every time more like a hostage of these situations. It is the State the only channel we have to redistribute wealth, to fight against concentration. Although is very difficult to establish a limit, I agree the State must confiscate a part of their gain to socialize it. Heavy regulation with a big presence of the State is what we have in Europe, where the best quality life we have. Again, let the private get their gain, but with the limit of the state. Call it regulation, percentage confiscation, whatever you like. Im not against the private property, I think it must be regulated by the State. If not, these companies is the one that govern us, and if they are above the State, how can we control them?

 

[Matiasba]

Yes unfortunately we don't collect world wide taxes. That makes providing worldwide services is kind of hard. Which is why countries collect taxes from their residents and provide services to the same.

Good job not answering my questions though.

The whole idea of a country is in crisis. The Nation as we know it I think no longer exists. We have very permeable borders todday, just look how many mexicans and latinos are living in the US...

which questions do you want me to answer?

 

[ajoknoblauch]

The whole idea of a country is in crisis. The Nation as we know it I think no longer exists. We have very permeable borders todday, just look how many mexicans and latinos are living in the US...

which questions do you want me to answer?

"Nation" and "country" are different entities, though they may overlap.

 

[GS_Dirtboy]

Putting aside the discussion on morality and practicality of public assistance someone are the land-grabs orchestrated by groups just to get paid? What about squatters that enter private residences? Why do the police not evict them?

 

[Matiasba]

"Nation" and "country" are different entities, though they may overlap.

Im talking of the modern State-Nation, XIXth and XXth century idea of Nation.

 

[ajoknoblauch]

Im talking of the modern State-Nation, XIXth and XXth century idea of Nation.

The "nation-state" is a total fiction. All states are multi-national.

 

[Matiasba]

The "nation-state" is a total fiction. All states are multi-national.

officially, when it funded, 19th century, were nation-states, one nation-state. The multinational state in the speech is something of the XXI st century, not even the XXth.

 

[ajoknoblauch]

officially, when it funded, 19th century, were nation-states, one nation-state. The multinational state in the speech is something of the XXI st century, not even the XXth.

Nonsense. Argentina, for example, has never been a nation-state. Nor has the United States, nor the Soviet Union, nor Spain, nor Finland etc. (The Finns may be a nation, for example, but the Finnish state governs substantial Swedish populations).

 

[Matiasba]

we re talking of different things. Argentinas foundation was when the nation-state concept spread wide on the world. The idea of a Nation-State in Argentina consolidated in the 1880s, and so in other countries of Latin America. i guess in France started with the French revolution, in Asia & Africa in the 1960s, etc. See the flag of Brazil? Orden y Progreso? that is the slogan of those times, positivism, make a huge State, etc.