• FundMECFS@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        The way i distinguish:

        property in that you have a piece of paper saying something is yours and you can prevent people from using that thing or extract value from it, while not using it yourself. That’s theft.

        But possession, ie. having things that you use, a house you live in etc. that’s not theft unless other circumstances that lead to the possession are theft.

          • lugal@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 day ago

            It’s all about terminology. I like the concept of usofruct where your right to own something is bound to either use it directly or collect its fruits (in a literal or figurative sense). So a landlord wouldn’t own a house but the people living there would. This has it’s roots in Roman law where ownership had three aspects: usus, fructus and abusus (misuse, destroy, …)

        • Zexks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          So you can never leave your house because as soon as you do you stop extracting value from it yet are preventing others from doing so themselves. So no one should be allowed homes or anything personal. As you can’t always be using something your entire life.

          • Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            You’re making up a rule that isn’t a part of the definition of personal property.

            Your home is still the place you live at even if you’re not currently in it. You address doesn’t change the moment you step out of your house does it? You use it by it being your place of residence, and that happens at all times.

            • Zexks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              15 hours ago

              I didn’t make anything up. There was no time component specified by which ownership is kept or lost. I would hazard a bet many of you strongly support squatters rights which are directly related to this yet not accounted for by the stated definitions. This is one of the prime cruxes of the private property argument is the ability for some to own property they don’t occupy all the time.

              • Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                14 hours ago

                There was no time component specified by which ownership is kept or lost

                Nor did I say there was.

                This is one of the prime cruxes of the private property argument is the ability for some to own property they don’t occupy all the time.

                The time has nothing to do with this.

                • Zexks@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 hours ago

                  It absolutely does. Can I just own a home and go off around the world and lock it down preventing all others from drawing value from it for years even decades of time. If not how much time must pass before it’s too much time. You want to say a day is fine so someone can go to work. What about 2 or 3 days. What about a week, a couple of months. Can I own one under my own name and my wife under hers and my kids separately under each of their own. What about a trust or some other financial vehicle, what exactly constitutes ownership.

      • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        This is so obvious I don’t understand why it needs highlighting. Nobody here is suggesting you cannot have stuff.