Wraith wrote: >> >> Nobody owns the property on the border? > > > Exactly. Its "owned" by the group of thugs commonly referred to as > government. > It would be entirely different if that land was private property.
Wrong, it is owned by the people who own land there. > >> There is no mixing of concepts, >> they are exactly the same. > > On the contrary, you are mixing private property with that of government. Except that the concept of common property is just as valid and predated the concept of private property. Since we are suppose to be the government, it is us who is suppose to have the say on how the commons is administered. Without the commons, and without any private property, you would have nether positive or negative rights, except for what somebody who did have negative property rights granted you positive rights on their property. > >> Some libertarians just ignore it to try >> to make the position tenable, when it isn't. >> Goat > > What position might that be? That a people doesn't have the right to keep others from trespass. Goat
