On the first day the Lord created Property

My Recent Posts

In the beginning was the Void, and the Lord spake, saying: There is nothing to own here. Let there be Property. 


And He could not see that it was good, so He spake, saying: What is the point of having Property if I cannot see it? Let there be Light. And He separated the Light from the Darkness and saw that the Property was good. 


And it was Evening and it was Morning, and the Lord spake, saying: My property is empty. It needs Worth. And so He created the Plants of the Earth to create beauty and to feed the Animals of the Earth, which He then created so He would have something to watch. And He created the Sun and the Moon and the Stars to illuminate His Property, Day and Night. And He created Clouds and Rain to feed the plants and animals, as they needed to grow to create Worth. And He placed Gold and Silver, Diamonds and Gems, Minerals, Metals, Coal and Oil, and placed them beneath the land to enhance its Worth.


And it was Evening and it was Morning, and the Lord spake, saying: I have no one to pass my Property to, nor have I anyone to Envy Me my Property, and so He created Man and Woman. And they saw His Property, and it was Good.  And Man  and Woman begat others to Work the Property.


Then it came to pass that the evil Fallen Angel, Satax, came upon Woman and said:

We should Share the Fruits of the Property with others, for they are also creations of the Lord, they work and are Deserving. Let us create Government to Tax the worth and Share it. And Woman went to Man, and persuaded him that this was right. 


This angered the Lord, who spake to Man and Woman, staying: If thou share the Worth, who shall envy thee? And so He banished them from his Sight.


We are the Propertarians and this is our Gospel.


And the Lord sent the Profits, to make sure His children valued the Worth.

And then the Lord sent His servant Jesus, who spake:

Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, for it is his Property.

And Jesus built an enormous Needle with a hole great enough for a Camel to pass through.


And out of Germany came a man most Evil whose writings would enslave large portions of the World. His name was Karl Marx and his writings brought about the Great Forced Sharing, the HoloCost. The HoloCost would last about three score and ten years until the sainted Reagan of Freedomland brought about its downfall. 


But the struggles would not end, as the Evil Democrats tried to bring Sharing to Freedomland, but they were beaten back by the Holy Warriors Gingrich, Nordquist, Koch the Elder, Koch the Slightly Younger, and Gecko. But the Lord was not pleased, and He warned that He would send the Kenyan to disperse much of Freedomland's Worth among the Medes and Persians, but the Medes were no more, so just the Persians. 


But though most of the People of Freedomland were still Evil, the Lord saved them in His infinite mercy with the Electoral College and brought them a King who is a True Propertarian to bring Worth to the Worthy in the Land.


The Worth be with you.

And also with you.


Stone-Eater Added Mar 7, 2019 - 4:15pm
FacePalm Added Mar 7, 2019 - 4:58pm
That's actually very well written, as a story, but perhaps like SEFa, i may be missing the point...
Koshersalaami Added Mar 7, 2019 - 5:33pm
The point is that I’ve run across a whole lot of people here who treat what I’m calling Propertarianism as gospel. Watch the people who treat the existence of traffic lights as socialism. This is pretty much how they treat the concept of private property, like no one ever has a claim on any of it for any reason, that every such claim in intrinsically theft, and that this theft is the most dangerous, unacceptable, and especially immoral political position in America. Property rights trump absolutely everything. 
As a moral position I find it ridiculous. This ridiculous. 
FacePalm Added Mar 7, 2019 - 6:12pm
Thanks for explaining, KS; i'm a little slow on the uptake sometimes.
i haven't run across any of the people you describe, but in light of the following, their protestations are laughable:
"The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State: individual so-called "ownership" is only by virtue of Government, i.e., law amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State.”
~ Senate Document No. 43 73rd Congress 1st Session. (Brown v. Welch supra)
(You own no Property because you are a slave. Really you are worse off than a slave because you are also a debtor.)
Steel Breeze Added Mar 8, 2019 - 9:39am
strange....i can view articles off my profile,but,have no front page.....
Koshersalaami Added Mar 8, 2019 - 10:19am
Technical issues. Autumn is working on them.
I’d just about guarantee you’ve run across the people I’m describing, but perhaps your conversations haven’t gone in the direction of viewing unfettered free enterprise not merely as a solution but as a moral principle. 
FacePalm Added Mar 8, 2019 - 11:08am
For me, the "free" part of "free enterprise" means that both/all parties come to a mutually beneficial agreement - otherwise, it's "compelled" enterprise, which i find abhorrent.
Koshersalaami Added Mar 8, 2019 - 11:46am
Except that the transaction often affects more than the immediate participants. We ignore other consequences at our own risk given that we typically live in the affected environment (“environment” defined broadly, including financial, social, economic, legal, and physical aspects, possibly more). 
Stone-Eater Added Mar 9, 2019 - 5:50am
What is "property" ? It lives on as long as one lives, then it's gone. That planet itself has no boundaries, it is round (well, take out the flat spiriters, erm, flat earthers LOL).
Property is a temporary thing, as everything is. So, not worth to think too much about it :-)
Koshersalaami Added Mar 9, 2019 - 7:49am
You’re asking the wrong person. I’m not a Propertarian. I think that some property has to transfer to make our country function and prosper. Wealth is concentrating and that will ultimately turn us into a Third World country if current trends continue - an absurd fate for the ultimate First World country. I’ve watched a lot of people here say that that sort of transfer amounts to theft,  that their first assumption is that property is sacred and why should any of their wealth go to anyone else under any circumstances other than being donated? They look at taxation, particular income taxation, as theft, without giving a thought to its role in national preservation and prosperity.  
And some of these people claim to be devoutly Christian.  My answer is that a religion that leads them to their conclusion would not look like Christianity, it would look like this. 
Dino Manalis Added Mar 9, 2019 - 8:39am
 Everyone and everything are property.
Koshersalaami Added Mar 9, 2019 - 9:01am
FacePalm Added Mar 9, 2019 - 9:11am
Except that the transaction often affects more than the immediate participants. We ignore other consequences at our own risk given that we typically live in the affected environment (“environment” defined broadly, including financial, social, economic, legal, and physical aspects, possibly more).
Well, since any business agreement which has the effect of harming third parties in their lives, liberty, or property is a tort, a criminal offense, there are remedies at law.
Morality cannot be legislated, but immorality can be punished, and is, eventually - whether by due process of law or by Eternal Law.
There's no escape from the latter but by repentance and making amends, where possible.
Koshersalaami Added Mar 10, 2019 - 8:44pm
Exchange between FP, Mogg and me deleted, including explanations and my own reply. None of it was relevant, all of it involved taking a fight from another thread here.
Neil Lock Added Mar 11, 2019 - 3:01pm
Koshersalaami: I suspect it may be me you are addressing when you talk of “unfettered free enterprise… as a moral principle.” I put the case for that here: http://writerbeat.com/articles/20633-On-Business-and-the-Economy.
I did, also, recently post here an essay about property. Maybe that is what prompted you to post this article. Now, I don’t have time to cut through the web of ritual that you seem to be trying to weave in this article. But let me try to put the dispute between us in as simple a way as I can.
I value property rights; you do not. So, why don’t you give up all your property, to those of us who value the idea of property? Your home, your car, your bank account? After all, you don’t find any value in possessions. So, we can make better use of your possessions than you can: no? We’ll use them for the purposes which we think fit. And if your, or your children’s, welfare isn’t among those purposes… why should we care?
You need to let that last paragraph sink in. And then, to try to understand why you’re wrong.
Koshersalaami Added Mar 11, 2019 - 6:15pm
Actually, I didn’t have you in mind. You are far from alone here. 
Being in favor of graduated taxation does not equal not valuing property rights. Not viewing property rights as the moral be all and end all does not equal not valuing property rights either. The main case I make for some sort of redistribution of wealth in this country is that this degree of polarization is bad for business and the economy. If graduated taxation and inheritance taxes on extreme fortunes (not confiscation) is what it takes to keep the United States from turning into a Third World country, then I am in favor of both. I do not view government as an instrument of theft under normal circumstances but as a necessary tool for the welfare of this country and its population and as an institution whose leadership is determined in elections. 
If property rights are the ultimate in morality, this is pretty much what the justifying religious text would look like. 
Neil Lock Added Mar 12, 2019 - 1:19pm
Koshersalaami: Well, your article certainly read like an anti-property rant. And in your story, "Satax" created government and taxation! I'm not sure I don't agree.
...but you favo(u)r re-distribution of wealth. Not restoration, to its rightful owners, of wealth that has been stolen through robbery, fraud, taxation or other such schemes. But political re-distribution. Which will always suck wealth from the politically poor, the powerless, to the politically rich and powerful. That's why the rich today, in the US and everywhere else, are getting richer, and the poor poorer. And the people in the middle are all but being squeezed out of existence.
I think you should distinguish property which has been justly earned from property which has been stolen. The latter should indeed be re-distributed - back to those who justly earned it. The former, not.
Koshersalaami Added Mar 12, 2019 - 10:12pm
No, it is NOT an anti-property rant. It an anti-putting-property-above-all-else rant. My views on redistribution are actually pretty close to Jeff Jackson’s, who is certainly no socialist. 
I don’t have a clean way of determining who rightly owns what. Because I don’t, I look at the economy, see something wrong with it, notice that the private sector isn’t fixing it, so where is there to turn? The rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer is a result of a lot, a prime example being companies like WalMart replacing local full time jobs with part time jobs in exchange for lower prices, which has created an enormous number of working poor, and has also meant that the public picks up the tab for medical costs of a lot of their employees when by rights that should be an employer function in the form of insurance benefits. In other words, the American public is subsidizing a company mostly owned by the richest family in the world. 
That’s what the market did to our economy. If we’re going to keep from becoming a Third World country with a minuscule middle class, we have to figure out how to  change that.  
I don’t care what vehicle we use to change it.  I just care that the vehicle actually does. 

Recent Articles by Writers Koshersalaami follows.