Freedom, Property, and Capital: Why is the Law Stealing Them?

In a society where property rights are undermined by legal plunder in the name of equality and safety, it is of no small wonder why people have taken leave of their senses. For freedom to work, people must be entitled to use what they have rightfully earned as they see fit. This is an idea that is highly misunderstood, and even demonized as society continues to allow itself to be governed by fear and ignorance for some misplaced sense of security and prosperity.

First of all, freedom to earn is needed for the individual themselves to prosper. If an individual is failing in a certain area, they receive no meaningful benefit by having their resulting downturn subsidized. Doing so only encourages them to continue failing instead of trying another route, and dependency is not a measure of success. Subsidizing failure grants the false sense of success where none exists. However if an individual is succeeding, then it means that they have figured out something that they can do that is appreciated by enough people to grant them a better means of living. It also means that they need no subsidies.

Second, if an individual who succeeds is forced to give a portion of their earnings to pay for a failure, then they have less means to help those who they know will truly benefit from it. In the middle class, success is not measured by mansions or boats, but rather a steady flow of income, a roof over their heads, food on the table, and the occasional splurge. Yet they have succeeded nonetheless. It then stands to reason that though they have made enough to get by fairly comfortably; they have little means to support the failures of anyone else. If forced to do so, they are then made poor as their ability to maintain what they worked so hard to obtain is taken from them. Therefore in order to maintain freedom (keeping in mind the previous point), a person must be allowed to keep what they earn to use as they see fit.

Finally you have the property aspect. Property is nothing more than a measure of success in a particular arena. If someone is a janitor their whole lives, then chances are they will live a humble existence with little property. If a person is an engineer of sorts, then chances are they will live a fairly middle class existence – their property increasing over time as their experience and ideas bring more value to the companies they choose to work for. If you are a financial wizard who is sensible and maintains a good relationship with your clients, then you can live far more comfortably, however you also have more to lose as you have far less room for error. In the end you have a choice of what path to take, and therefore your own ability to bring enough value to society to obtain the level of property you want. This is the very essence of merit which is the pillar of any free society. The more value you bring to society, the more you earn, and the more property you may acquire.

The essence of a good investment then comes in terms of time, money, and effort. You can give two people a million dollars. One may blow it in under a year and find themselves poor again, and at the expense of your million. The other will save, come up with a good business idea, and use the funds to start a successful business. A wise investor uses money that they earned to benefit society by granting x amount to produce something that society will value. This does come with risk which is why investments are never made lightly. However if their investment was sound, then they reap the rewards by getting their money back with either interest or a portion of the new business.

Unfortunately we live in a society that sees things a different way. Let’s start with the legal side.

The law recognizes natural rights only in terms of living, breathing, and eating. It views property as an acquired item which I can find no fault with. However it then goes on to claim the right to your acquired property by saying that it is a privilege the state grants you to use your acquired property as it is not something you were born into this world with. In some cases the state does not bother to regulate your acquired property as an item it grants you the privilege to use. This is both hypocritical and misguiding to the individuals understanding of both property, and the regulation thereof.

The state does not regulate the jewelry you own, nor does it regulate the books you buy – yet. Therefore most people think of privileged property as only being the things not necessary for life in general. This is why the ones dependant on government handouts and subsidies (even if only as a perceived benefit ) feel that the rich should have to give more to them, and why it is the states job to make it happen. After all, it is perceived that the rich have all this money and property that is not regulated (as are other items understood by the common man), therefore they must be cheating the poor and have no real right to the ‘ill-gotten’ gains.

This of course of nonsense, and here is why it is also hypocritical.

Let’s start with something that even many poor people have on some level – cars. The state considers a car to be acquired property, and therefore sees itself as having control over it. Because the state has the overall control over the car, you are privileged to use it as long as you meet the mandates placed upon its use by the state. Failure to meet these mandates results in the state revoking your rights to use your own property, and all too often lead to its confiscation or neglect. Oh, and this is not because you are driving on the ‘state owned roads’. You pay for gas and its taxes, so you paid for the roads making them yours – not the states.

Because these mandates are made on the poor and rich alike, it is seen as a social norm, and therefore rarely an object of inequality in reference to cars. But by failing to apply the same legal controls on jewelry, fine clothes, and other luxury items, there is a both a disconnect and a contradiction in the freedom to ones justly acquired property. This problem is created because of two reasons.

The first is that the state believes its number one duty is to control it subjects…err, I mean citizens. Cars are needed to get one from point a to point b in the most expedient manner. Guns are needed to ensure one’s own defense. Electricity and running water is needed to provide some comfort enjoyed by all classes of people, rich and poor. Food is needed just to live. By controlling these most basic of things, the state effectively controls everyone. As always the states reasoning for this is that people cannot be trusted to uses these most basic of things in a non destructive manner, and certainly not in a fair manner. We will cover the prior first.

In the name of safety, we have the DHS, DMV, DoD, NSA, CIA, FBI, DOT, DOA, DOJ, SEC, a host of local law enforcement agencies, and over 20 other entities to make sure the subjects behave themselves. To fund all of these protective measures that everyone swears is necessary to the survival of a civilized society, costs a boatload of money. Money that is paid for by the government issuance of debt, and taxes. I am no fan of Ben Franklin, but boy did he call this one...............(continued below)...

http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5459/freedom-property-and-capitol-why-is-the-l...