Property taxes also aren’t egregious if you don’t live in an expensive house in an expensive area.
The problem is that most of ya’ll have been conditioned to think “that’s not good enough for you” even when you can’t afford more. Then entitlement kicks in where you think you deserve more before others who have less and before you know it, Bernie loses the nomination and we’re stuck with a trump presidency.
DigitalDruid@lemmy.sdf.org 2 days ago
your interpretation of the concept of ownership practically renders the word meaningless.
to most people it does in fact mean that it can’t normally be taken away, even though such a thing might be physically or legally possible.
absentbird@lemm.ee 2 days ago
It’s not meaningless, it’s about who controls a thing. What makes you think ownership must not have conditions?
sfu@lemm.ee 2 days ago
If you own something, and someone takes it from you, its called theft. If its not theft when they take it from you, then you didn’t own it.
absentbird@lemm.ee 2 days ago
That would mean all taxes are theft, all forfeitures, all repossessions, and all seizures. It’s a simplistic understanding of the concept that reduces ownership to whoever currently possess property.
You’re welcome to have that perspective, but it doesn’t map well onto any modern legal framework for ownership.
Bgugi@lemmy.world 1 day ago
You could take the interpretation of “ownership” to many ridiculous conclusions, from “all ownership is theft” to “nothing is owned” to “all governent is crime” to “all taxation is theft” etc…
From a practical standpoint, “ownership” is an arbitrary threshold of exclusivity that is generally respected by society under appropriate conditions. Where that threshold and what the conditions are will vary by the type of property and general social sensibilities.