link to original reddit post by /u/Chaos2718
Came across an interesting case recently that highlights the value of private property and, more importantly, why "public" (government owned, whoever convinced everybody that "public" = government must have been some kind of evil genius) property doesn't work:
https://news.yahoo.com/u-billionaire-stan-kroenke-wins-215622330.html
Basically, Stan Kroenke owns a bunch of land that happens to surround two government owned lakes so the public can't access the lakes without trespassing on his property. The common response to this is, of course, repulsion at the horrible property rights that allow this evil rich guy to exploit this loophole.
There is increasing pressure in British Columbia to establish “right-to-roam” laws.
But to me it seems clear that this is simply a failing of the government to effectively manage its property (surprise).
“It makes no sense to me,” Justice Joel Groves wrote in the original 2018 decision, “that the Crown would retain ownership of the lakes, only for there to be no access.”
The judge who sided with the recreational group makes a very good point, what property owner in their right mind would let this happen? They would have bought the land to build a road to their lake and then charged people to come visit the lake. But of course the government doesn't need to make money; they, in their infinite wisdom, just sit there and protect the property from being bought by evil people like Stan.