SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Lane3 who wrote (146879)11/13/2005 7:17:28 PM
From: Maurice Winn  Read Replies (1) of 793917
 
Being born to trespassers shouldn't confer ownership of the property which the trespassers are occupying.

The whole problem of citizenship derives from the concept of citizens as serfs who are owned by the state [king, dictator, emperor etc], rather than property-owning shareholders.

We wouldn't have people sneak into a QUALCOMM building, have a baby and the baby therefore owns the company. Or, if somebody sneaked into your house and had a baby, you wouldn't think they therefore have a right to own your house, or occupy it.

Clearing up the concept of property rights in regard to public property is what's needed. It should not be owned by "the state" but by individuals as nominated shareholders.

Their citizenship should form part of their estate.

When people realize that citizenships are worth $millions rather than $000s, then perhaps things will be made more sensible.

Basically, citizenship is run on the old communist ideas where we all own everything together, though in fact the political bosses own it and dispose of it at their whims. At least in democracies there is some accountability to the citizenry. But while citizens don't own that property directly and can vote with their feet, selling out, it's a charade.

Mqurice
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext