803
submitted 11 months ago by Custoslibera@lemmy.world to c/memes@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] irmoz@reddthat.com 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It's fucking bonkers that you think the definition of "things" is what's at issue here.

I'm not disputing that lmao. But upholding private property law is not running the market. That would be, like i said, a planned economy.

[-] AlDente@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago

What's bonkers is that you still haven't offered up your position so it's difficult to deduce where you are going with this. The original claim was that personal property cannot exist without state protection. I disagree with this and think the black market is a perfect example of a capitalist market that exists outside the protection of the state (and in defiance of it). However, for the sake of constructive dialoge, I conceded that the power structure at the top of the black market could possibly be considered a quasi-state that protects their interests. Now what is your point? Wouldn't a communist economy still have a central authority to protect the property of the people? Are you against the idea of personal property in general? Personally, I support the concepts of personal property, free markets, and increasing taxes on billionaires.

[-] irmoz@reddthat.com 1 points 11 months ago

I never mentioned personal property. I'm talking about private property.

this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2023
803 points (82.4% liked)

Memes

45180 readers
1532 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS