I definitely didn't. What don't you understand, property, OTHER THAN what is produced by his own hands, he owes a portion of. It is plainly written.
think just a little bit. it is the safety and security and infrastructure that society builds that make it valuable.
Yeah, I know what you're trying to say. So, are you also saying that the policies and tactics of the Democrats are further ensuring our security and property rights?
So what you are saying, is that if i lived on an island and there was nobody around, and then I went around the island gathered materials and built a house, I didnt acquire that house? If I made my own clothes from the plants on the island, do I still not own those clothes? If those items are not my personal property, whose personal property is it? And what about my food. If i go fishing, isnt that fish mine? As in MY personal property? There is nobody to say it isnt, right?
Thomas Paine's "Agrarian Justice" was an interesting piece of work in that it was more specific than many of his other papers. He proposed an individual/societal relationship that wasn't an all-or-nothing proposition. Paine felt that society contributed a measurable amount to an individual's success and therefore an individual owed a specific percentage in return. This was a topic that he often touched upon, but was rarely so specific as he was in this soliloquy. (I refer to it as such, because it's often unclear as to whom Paine was speaking, and it was proposed that his writing style was fashioned after the dramatic device that was so prevalent during his time.) Irrespective of style, the question becomes not one of "with-or-without," but rather of "how much?" Paine suggests that individuals, upon their death, pay 10% (one tenth of accumulated wealth) to give back to society that which society had contributed. Personally, I don't mind paying taxes that reflect what society contributes to my success. Ten percent of my accumulated wealth payable upon my death sounds about right.
Of course they did, and thanks for saying that. It is kind of a DUH moment, so obvious. We at least have courts to keep others from taking our property away. I can attest tot that form instances over they years.
What is being said, is that no matter what you did to build the house on some island, that someone could come along and take it from you much easier if there were no society or infrastructure and laws in place. Call the cops, go to court, can't do that if there is no Society, right?
The title says its impossible for an individual to acquire personal property without society...so how could someone "acquire" (steal) my personal property if there is no society. I thought it was "impossible".
I am going to try to be polite... but your handle just invites ridicule. What a grand circular argument you have there. Just what is society without productive individuals? who gives 'society' its own value? Paine is wrong in the absolute sense, personal property is a just a legal label. If I had my own planet and grew my food, it would be just as much my 'personal property' for my own purposes as if I lived in manhatten. If I built a house it would also be just as valuable to me. Rich is an ill defined term, paine pretends he can build arguments around it. Things of intrinsic value like land are not made valuable by society, and if you give me an island I may not very well care if the rest of you exist This big god you all worship, an entity called government that provides all, except you never define how that mechanism called collectivism really creates societal value, mostly it creates regulation and order at best (the founding fathers vision), but actually destroys value many times like with Solyndra. All societal value flows from the individual up, it's so elementary and fundamental that its beyond your comprehension. Society is nothing without the outstanding individuals who did in fact 'build it'. Even roads are built and funded by creative individuals. Government is the do-nothing middleman that takes the credit at the end (only when it goes right) , just like Obama does, who has done nothing himself. Here's one for you. Organized wars are impossible without government.