[deevolution]

Think about the energy demanded by Ownership. Do you think the majority of people would be able to sustain their property? Owning a house, for example, is demanding work and if you, as an individual dont have the time, motivation, commitment or know-how to sustain the property then it becomes a losing investment and a mental and physical burden. Ultimately, it's kind of wasteful. In an owenshipless society people can spend less time and energy dealing with the baggage that comes with owning something and can instead invest that time and energy into other, more productive or leisurely things. I think it's great!

edit: specifically I think it's great because I believe overall quality of life will increase due to this shift.

[rhn_mk1]

I think you missed the part where someone else is the owner. The parent stated that they're worried about a smaller and smaller group owning most everything.

Owning less, and not having to maintain the ownership of multiple different things is good. Having a few people own them for everyone is not.

Some sort of a solution, still compatible with your remark, might be reached if the new "specialized" ownership was distributed in a way that no single group amasses a lot of power.

[acdw]

This, precisely. I rent my house right now. It's a good deal because I don't have to worry about maintenance, property taxes, etc. But it's only worth it because I rent from someone who only owns a few properties -- he's a small player, so he has time to be responsive to my needs and his other renters' needs. It's a win-win situation this way.

There would be a problem if I rented from a property management corporation. Just from a logistics standpoint, they simply wouldn't have as many resources to help me when I have maintenance needs on my (really, their) house. That's ignoring all the other problems that come with concentrated ownership -- the buying of political power, etc.

I don't know what the answer is, I wish I did. Maybe something like what you say, a sort of "specialized" ownership. I don't know what that would look like though.

[eldavido]

I think there's something to this.

A lot of these changes are driven by economies of scale. It's much more efficient to live in a huge apartment building than hundreds of small houses. You use less energy, the overall maintenance bills are less, etc.

But you give up some independence and more things become about politics. Example: if my pipe breaks in my house I just hire a plumber and fix it. If I live in a huge condo/apartment I have to convince the manager to fix it. That allows all kind of favoritism and chicanery to emerge.

I think we'll find a new equilibrium where fewer things are owned (more leased/rented) because it is genuinely more convenient, and "efficient" in some sense. But it's less robust (in the Talebian "antifragile" sense). But it's not going to swing all the way. We'll have to build new mental tools/understanding to cope with the new set of options that we didn't have before.