Possession instead of ownership

[rupol2000]

I'm not sure if the terminology is clear, and I will explain what I mean.

The main difference is that property includes the right of alienation. By possesion, I mean ownership without the right of alienation, but delegation is assumed instead. For example, a knight owns an allotment and goes to war. He delegates the right of power on this land to his younger brother, but at any time he can return it to himself.

This has the advantage, because in this case it is impossible to get possession of the object as a result of speculation, deception or other unfair appropriation, on the other hand, it is in no way inferior to property in terms of use.

 

[Votto]

I'm not sure if the terminology is clear, and I will explain what I mean.

The main difference is that property includes the right of alienation. By possesion, I mean ownership without the right of alienation, but delegation is assumed instead. For example, a knight owns an allotment and goes to war. He delegates the right of power on this land to his younger brother, but at any time he can return it to himself.

This has the advantage, because in this case it is impossible to get possession of the object as a result of speculation, deception or other unfair appropriation, on the other hand, it is in no way inferior to property in terms of use.

Spare me all the lawyer mombo jombo.

I think property ownership is a farce. I mean, if you have to pay taxes on it then you are just renting from the government who at any time can jack the taxes up so you can't afford it any longer and simply take it from you

Or they have the right to imminent domain and seize your property as they give you what they say is a "fair" price for the land. LOL.

Essentially we have no rights other than what the elitists in government want to give us or let us have, as they increasingly take more and more.

 

[rupol2000]

Spare me all the lawyer mombo jombo.

I think property ownership is a farce. I mean, if you have to pay taxes on it then you are just renting from the government who at any time can jack the taxes up so you can't afford it any longer and simply take it from you

Or they have the right to imminent domain and seize your property as they give you what they say is a "fair" price for the land. LOL.

Essentially we have not rights other than what the elitists in government want to give us or let us have, as they increasingly take more and more.

I agree with it. The state can even simply take away property under some pretext. But this is still not the right topic. If we assume that the state is just, it will not do it. But at the same time, there remains the possibility of unfair weaning from the outside, and we are discussing this.

 

[Votto]

I agree with it. The state can even simply take away property under some pretext. But this is still not the right topic. If we assume that the state is just, it will not do it. But at the same time, there remains the possibility of unfair weaning from the outside, and we are discussing this.

But when does the state ever admit to being unjust?

LOL.

The state can do whatever it wants, and it can do whatever it wants to those who protest with an army of propagandists in the media to "explain" how fair they really are about it all.

Just look at the protesters from January 6th.

Many I hear have fled the country.

For me, the law ends up becoming just a civilized way for the super rich to plunder and steal and enforce fascism for the state.

 

[rupol2000]

I think property ownership is a farce. I mean, if you have to pay taxes on it then you are just renting from the government who at any time can jack the taxes up so you can't afford it any longer and simply take it from you

And in fact, it is not entirely reasonable to talk about this, because in any case the ownership right is given by the state, because it ensures and protects it.

 

[Votto]

And in fact, it is not entirely reasonable to talk about this, because in any case the ownership right is given by the state, because it ensures and protects it.

Whatever the state decides will be deemed "fair" will be fair as they increasingly lay hold of our possessions to redistribute them

This is why socialism is so wonderful. Socialists always knows what is fair.

Thank God they are in power now or just imagine how unfair everything would be.

 

[rupol2000]

But when does the state ever admit to being unjust?

LOL.

The state can do whatever it wants, and it can do whatever it wants to those who protest.

Just look at the protesters from January 6th.

Many I hear have fled the country.

For me, the law ends up becoming just a civilized way for the super rich to plunder and steal and enforce fascism for the state.

Probably a mechanism against the arbitrariness of the state is in a freer federalism, when the center is limited in its arbitrariness either because it fears an uprising, or because it fears collapse. Probably each state of the federation should have its own army.

 

[rupol2000]

This is why socialism is so wonderful. Socialists always knows what is fair.

This is just a direct path to the arbitrariness of the central government.

 

[Votto]

Probably a mechanism against the arbitrariness of the state is in a freer federalism, when the state is limited in its arbitrariness either because it fears an uprising, or because it fears collapse. Probably each state of the federation should have its own army.

Put that in the suggestion box of the centralized Federal Congress. I'm sure they will get right on that, just as soon as they impose term limits on themselves. LOL.

I'll visit you in jail even and bring you flowers even, but then, it would brand me an insurrectionist, or as the democrats often call them erectionists.

Perverts.

But that is what happens when you are free to go round screwing anyone you feel like screwing all day, every day, 24/7.

 

[rupol2000]

just as soon as they impose term limits on themselves. LOL.

if everyone there wanted centralization, there would be no republicans

 

[Votto]

if everyone there wanted centralization, there would be no republicans

Republicans? You mean the ones that just voted for Biden's trillion dollar inflation bill?



They are all a bunch of lawyers and we all know what reputation they all have

They have earned it as they destroy entire countries.

 

[rupol2000]

Republicans? You mean the ones that just voted for Biden's trillion dollar inflation bill?



They are all a bunch of lawyers and we all know what reputation they all have

They have earned it as they destroy entire countries.

Nevertheless, America is still the only country with real federalism.