[globular-toast]

Ownership is overrated. It's not a universally good thing. In many cases it's a huge liability. The things you own end up owning you.

Would you want to own the stretch of road outside your house? What benefit would you get from it? You'd now be responsible for maintaining it and presumably you'd take out an insurance policy in case of freak events damaging it. You'd pray for a mild winter and hope your neighbours don't buy heavy vehicles that will start tearing it up. Much better to let the government own it, I think.

What benefit do you get from car ownership? Do you modify your car? Do you enjoy doing your own maintenance? For many people, the answer to both is a resounding no. For almost everyone, doing maintenance and repairs is totally impractical even if they were inclined to do so. Do you really own something if you are forced to take to the dealers regularly for maintenance and when things go wrong?

So what does the ownership get you? The sole responsibility if something goes wrong. The sole responsibility of keeping it maintained and roadworthy or disposing of it if you decide to write it off. And remember you can't really just write it off because you need it to get to work every day, plus it's a huge asset that you can't afford to replace outright.

For a very large number of people, "car ownership" really means the car owns them.

Ownership is great for many things, but each thing needs to be considered on its own merits. For most people, car ownership really doesn't make much sense.

[em500]

> Ownership is overrated.

I'm largely with you on this, philosophically, rationally, economically. But we're probably a tiny majority, most people seem to react on emotion on this.

Amateur psychology time: I think a large component of the desire to own is insecurity about future availability and prices. In my personal case, I find that as I got older and moved up the income ladder, I seem to increasingly loose the desire to own. Partly because I can easily absorb much more price volatility now. Partly because of increased self-knowledge / life experience, that in practice there are almost no material possessions that I really want to own for very long times.

[JohnWhigham]

This is more about fighting the powers that be and them taking away the ability to own anything at a reasonable price, period. Great example is the WSJ story yesterday about asset managers and foreign investors snatching up every house on the market. Don't you want the ability to own something if you feel the desire to do so, or would you rather corporations buy it from out under you/rent it back to you and there be no other option?

[globular-toast]

> Don't you want the ability to own something if you feel the desire to do so

Well... that's not really how things work, is it? Already there are things that you will never be able to own and a lot of it depends on the circumstances of your birth.

Since you mention houses it touches upon another point which you may have been suggesting. Should ownership of certain basic things be a right? What should be included in that? A basic house of some standard? A car? It doesn't seem obvious what should and shouldn't be included.

[JohnWhigham]

A basic house of some standard? A car?

Well, 60 years ago those were attainable relatively quickly for someone without a high school degree. Now they aren't (unless you want to live in the middle of nowhere) for someone even with a college degree. So something went awry in the meantime.

[globular-toast]

Just because something was possible doesn't mean it should always be possible. I'm not saying whether it should or shouldn't be in this case; I really don't know. But it should be obvious that in the past ~100 years people have been taking far too much from the Earth without any thought to sustainability or the future. What was common 60 years ago was not necessarily right.