Raise the Hammer

LL, you are a hoot. Instead of addressing the obvious holes in your arguments regarding private property, incentives and labour exploitation you accuse me of essentially being a racist. Just so we're clear, where did I say I was in favour of genocide?

Furthermore, just because you feel more comfortable framing your arguments by using other people's ideas, does not mean I don't have an awareness of history. One must be careful in saying "they" understand history, simply because they have spent some time at the library. The fact of the matter is, history books are only as accurate as the people who write them, so placing too much emphasis on them as primary material, can lead to bad conclusions.

I also like that you tell me I haven't looked at the processes that create wealth. How do you know I haven't? All you have to do is look around the world today and you will see that the common denominator in growth of material wealth, are free markets, property rights and less intrusive government involvement in the economy. Compare post Deng Xiaoping China with Mao Zedong China and anyone can see the benefits that come with letting individuals drive economic decisions, rather than planning boards.

Your failure to put forth any reasonable argument in favour of abolishing private property is telling. You have offered no examples that support this economic structure, other than the intentions of dead Russian philosophers. Furthermore, you don't even offer a hypothesis as to why it would be more effective. All you have done is criticize a system that has lifted close to a billion people out of poverty in the past three decades, simply because you don't like the idea of some people getting rich.

Your arguments are nothing more than a reflection of your own personal envy, rather than an honest look at how we can all get rich together. The fact is, human beings/cultures need both competition and cooperation if they are to be successful and that is exactly what the free market is all about. By abolishing private property, you are removing the competition side of the equation, which also kills the motivation to innovate.

Lastly, I would love to know why you want to abolish private property if money isn't that important to people. If your hypothesis is correct, then there is no need to fight against it. However, if private property does act as a motivator and you are wrong in your assumption, then you also must recognize the importance in allowing people to accumulate private property. Since everyone knows that motivation is the key in creating productive works, barring a key motivator in the name of equality is a sure way to stop innovation from happening.