RE: RE: private property?

["Charles Brown" <CharlesB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>> dshemano@xxxxxxxxxx 12/06/00 08:20PM >>>No matter what political-economic system you can imagine, rules are going to
have to be established.  Somebody has to decide whether to devote resources
to guns or butter.  Somebody has to decide where my space ends and your
space begins.  "Private property" is my shorthand for saying the rules will
provide that with respect to any specific resource, commodity, etc., a
single individual gets to decide issues of possession, use and transfer.
"Private property" can evolve to take many forms, often unpredictable and
complex.  To take the example of Exxon, 50,000 people each own individual
shares of Exxon.  At some relevant level, a single person has exclusive
right to possess, use and transfer the share without the approval of any
other person.  Notwithstanding the diffusion of ownership, the corporation
is remarkably efficient in performing its societal role.

((((((((((

CB: Isn't there a much smaller number of people than 50,000 who have effective control over the Exxon ?

((((((((((



I believe, as an empirical matter, that "private property" is the most
efficient means to achieve the ends that I believe are important.  If you
believe that there is something inherently noble in democratic decision
making regardless of the results of the decision making, then you have
chosen an end which I do not share.

((((((((((

CB: I thought you thought 50,000 owners worked fine at Exxon.