I agree with the point that land is owned by the one strong enough to enforce ownership.
Certified psycho. If you think owning a plot of land within a country does not have an opportunity cost you are wrong. If you think people imposing costs on others shouldn’t pay for it say it out loud.
Just go and found your own country already, you just need a gun in order to enforce your ownership. In the end a state is just the monopoly of force in a place.
Spaniard@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Gladaed@feddit.org 3 days ago
We don’t rent it from them. We pay for continued ownership. The difference being that eviction is not possible and you do not need permits unless you do something more involved to your property. Calling it renting discounts the complexities that renting brings with it. The costs of renting usually are much higher than property taxes.
BeardedBlaze@lemmy.world 2 days ago
“We pay for continued ownership” sure sounds like rent to me. Make sure you tell those that had their house/property taken away from them due to eminent domain how eviction is not possible.
Gladaed@feddit.org 2 days ago
At that point the term renting becomes something else entirely and therefore useless to discriminate between renters and homeowners. this discrimination is useful, hence we must not weaken our language.
Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 2 days ago
It’s more like a tax, you choose to purchase land from the city, and in exchange you must pay the city annually for the privilege of owning the land, and if you don’t for long enough the city might seize the land from you. Could even call it a property tax…
captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Yeah, this is one of the meanings of “property is theft”. To own land is deny all others that piece of land.