It's not about the dirt itself, at least not to me, when I look at it as a
problem to be solved within a non-aggression framework.

It's about two main things.

1. The space itself, because we are a voluminous species that, at scale, is
nontrivial to our planet's size.

2. A multiplier on that space's particular desirability vs. other
identically-sized spaces. This is for proximity of the space to other
things of desire. Bodies of water, pleasant climate, other people, fast
internet… ;)

For the duration that you "own" the land, the stuff you take out of it is
forever yours for you to trade or use as you please. The rights are for the
space, nothing fancier. Not the atoms in it.

They're yours while you're there, and they may affect the cost due to #2,
but you aren't taxed for the diamond you dug up and took with you or
something. *That dirt is yours. *

All you owed the community for it was already factored into the Consensus
Threshold Contribution, a term I just made and will abbreviate CTC in my
writings henceforth ;)



On Tuesday, October 7, 2014, Chris Pacia <ctpacia@???> wrote:

>
> >
> >> "They say that private property is derived from an individual's right
> to the fruits of their labor. Since land was not created by anyone's labor,
> it cannot be rightfully owned."
>
> All property is derived from land in this sense. Indeed that's how
> economists use the term 'land'.
>
> Keep in mind nothing was ever "created" it was merely transformed. We take
> land (natural resources) and transform it into goods for our consumption.
>
> If you want to say anything that you did not create must be owned by the
> collection you are including every last thing on planet earth since nothing
> was ever "created", only transformed.
>
> This philosophy more or less breaks down into garden variety
> collectivism. _______________________________________________
> > unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
> >
>