This story is unavailable.

I agree that in a perfect market, the LVT doesn’t change behaviour(except for the inequality issue). But we don’t live in a perfect market.

But for arguments sake let just say we did, else we are conflating two separate issues. Lets say none of us own our own land, we rent it and perhaps the immovable capital of each other too.

Well, we’d still need the LVT, because the unequal ownership (not use) of productive natural resources is fundamentally unjust. Just like slavery and theft are unjust.

As no one created this Earth they do not have a property right to exclude anyone else from it’s use.

Not today, or the Native Americans in the past. It doesn’t belong to anyone, either now or then. It is to be equally shared.

Buying something doesn’t confer a property right. Else stolen goods would be legal.

Buying slaves was a perfectly legal enterprise. But that didn’t confer a moral property right either else slavery would still be legal wouldn’t it?

Only the creation of a good or service and its provenance confers a moral property right.

Not the buying of something, not legal title, not finders keeper, not first use or any other such nonsense.

In which case, we cannot own this Earth, we can only share it as equal human beings. If we do not, then it follows that one group has taken an unfair share to the detriment of the rest.

Would you like to justify why you think we shouldn’t share this Earth as equal human beings? Because that is your current position.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.