Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Answer me this: are there millions of normal people living in major cities? It's a simple yes/no question. (Everyone on this forum knows you won't answer)
We'll just keep referring back to you ignoring this every time you repeat the same lie that you've answered every question. 300 posts in this thread (basically a full time job for you) yet typing 2-3 letters yes/no escapes you.
Buying property for speculation purposes or profit is separate from buying something for its function.
That means demand is increased from the former when it should only be affected by the latter.
So, you are now perfectly OK with me buying a vacation home I use for a few weeks per year, keeping it locked up tight when not in use so other people don't mess with my stuff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324
Purchasing property is a show of demand.
If people could no longer profit from owning property like commodities, land, or stocks, the incentive for that demand would no longer exist.
In its place commerce and demand would be based on the function of the good, not its monetary value.
In that case, everyone would be living in hovels, since there would be no way to get more capital to improve anything. Do you really want your mother to spend her days going blind from spinning wool or cotton into thread by candle light? Or your father to suffer physically from plowing with a mule? I can't believe you hate your parents that much. Absent the ability to make a profit on investments, very little of the infrastructure we rely on for modern goods would exist. You wouldn't have your computer to play with, since a silicon wafer fab costs about a billion dollars to build, and that ain't happening with a small local group of craft workers.
So, you are now perfectly OK with me buying a vacation home I use for a few weeks per year, keeping it locked up tight when not in use so other people don't mess with my stuff.
In that case, everyone would be living in hovels, since there would be no way to get more capital to improve anything. Do you really want your mother to spend her days going blind from spinning wool or cotton into thread by candle light? Or your father to suffer physically from plowing with a mule? I can't believe you hate your parents that much. Absent the ability to make a profit on investments, very little of the infrastructure we rely on for modern goods would exist. You wouldn't have your computer to play with, since a silicon wafer fab costs about a billion dollars to build, and that ain't happening with a small local group of craft workers.
1. This is not worth a response. Vacant land is not meant to be ‘owned’.
2. This is nonsense, there are more forms of investments than corporate investments. Firstly corporations and small businesses will still invest to increase production capacity, and cooperative investment would replace the value added one we have no that produces zero real wealth.
Okay. I'm pretty sure that sentence didn't mean anything.
There is nothing contrary to a free-market, voluntary system in exchanging a promise for future returns for a sum of money (or other goods) in the present.
So here's a question that you'll completely sidestep: Do you own anything you're not using *right now*? If you're on your computer, does that mean I can take your car since you're presumably not using them at the same time? If not, why?
Usage is not defined solely by presence. When I leave my house to go outside, I still live there.
When I stop using my computer, it is still my personally property that I physically store, and which is under my control.
That is different from property that is not in usage but is handled by others, from which I profit by. A second home I rent away, ownership of stocks and commodity I don’t touch, etc.
Personal property or possessions includes "items intended for personal use"[3] (e.g., one's toothbrush, clothes, homes, and vehicles,[3] and sometimes money).[4] It must be gained in a socially fair manner, and the owner has a distributive right to exclude others
The land/home you live in is not about ownership per say, but it is the area of land one controls that is affected by personal property. So if people can only own what they personally control, they by affect control the area that property is moved to and operated by.
The means you couldn’t sell your house in your name, but for the duration of time you are there, it is yours by the nature of control.
And again you are incapable of communicating. You know what I said is bare bone knowledge.
Demand can either come from functional desires, or it can come from wealth value.
So person a could buy a painting to view and collect, or a house to live in.
Another person could buy that same house or painting, but not for its own intrinsic value, but to re-sale at a higher price or hold wealth inside (as capital asset).
The latter increases demand, as otherwise people would only purchase what they themselves wanted for its own potential function.
You know this though and instead pretend to act dumb.
Personal property or possessions includes "items intended for personal use"[3] (e.g., one's toothbrush, clothes, homes, and vehicles,[3] and sometimes money).[4] It must be gained in a socially fair manner, and the owner has a distributive right to exclude others
The land/home you live in is not about ownership per say, but it is the area of land one controls that is affected by personal property. So if people can only own what they personally control, they by affect control the area that property is moved to and operated by.
The means you couldn’t sell your house in your name, but for the duration of time you are there, it is yours by the nature of control.
So if I want your house I just have to remove it from your control? Sounds great! One sec while I go grab a shovel and some duct tape.
any bets we have a non investor here ..... nothing is ever suggested that effects the person with the bad idea . it always effects others .
check out his posts on P&C and you will see the poster just hates government in every form. This is just more of the same ...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Okay. I'm pretty sure that sentence didn't mean anything.
