就算資源不緊繃，土地擁有權還是有內在悖論的:

Imagine, one works hard, saves enough money and buys some land, then, surely his ownership of the land should be respected. But what about 1000 years afterward, should his descendants be granted the right to keep other humans away from utilising this piece of land for generations and generations since someone "bought" it monetarily 1000years ago?

Obviously not. The land is a natural resource. It is part of nature.

更長遠說，世界層麵上看，國家的國土擁有權也是如此。衹是因為人類的"文明"製度使這個土地擁有權不能自然消散而要通過殘酷的鬥爭。而資源緊繃又使這個悖論更突出。

 

 

所有跟帖： 

• 不存在合理的所有權製度，特別是對土地等自然資源的私有化。。。 -FarewellDonkey18- ♂ (0 bytes) () 10/07/2022 postreply 13:28:02

• 存在合理的所有權製度... I think, -中間小謝- ♂ (672 bytes) () 10/07/2022 postreply 14:41:00

• 所有的所有製都帶著曆史的烙印，並受現實的限製。稅收可能是最現實的即時調節，但前提是稅負不能被轉嫁。歐洲近代的固定貨幣地租 -FarewellDonkey18- ♂ (417 bytes) () 10/07/2022 postreply 15:04:44