Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by hnnewguy 4141 days ago
>Take land - demand for it changes over time, the exact same amount is in circulation as there was 200 years ago, the value goes up as population increases and it becomes more scarce

Why is that a good system? Why should people who happened to be here before our time have an inherent economic advantage by owning land? Wouldn't the world be a better place if we could cheaply create all the land we wanted?
1 comments
zo1 4141 days ago
The world is not fair, period. You can't expect individuals to work their asses off to strive for something better for themselves and their children, only to turn around and complain that their children suddenly have "inherent economic advantage"... followed by a swift call to somehow "fix" that so that everyone is equal all over again.

Oh yes, of course. Some individuals did some rather bad, questionable things to get an advantage in this world. But until you can prove that all "well-off" individuals did that, you have no moral ground to stand on.

link
hnnewguy 4141 days ago
>But until you can prove that all "well-off" individuals did that, you have no moral ground to stand on.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

Are you telling me that if we had the technological wherewithal to "create land" at will, you wouldn't use it? That you'd recommend we continue to deal with land scarcity? If not, why would you recommend those same actions when it comes to money?

link
zo1 4141 days ago
>"I have no idea what you're talking about."

Ask me which parts you're confused about.

>"Are you telling me that if we had the technological wherewithal to "create land" at will, you wouldn't use it?"

See, land is not the same as money when discussing inflation. But most of my comment was directly discussing plain money-printing or inflation, not land-creation. And if you really must know: if we had some magical-fairy-powers to create a physical resource out of thin nothing (with no cost/effort), then I think land ownership would be the last thing we'd have to worry about. You've effectively created a post-scarcity economy.

>"If not, why would you recommend those same actions when it comes to money?"

Please re-read my initial comment. Your entire argument rested on individuals having an unfair advantage simply because they were "be there before" us. And I basically told you that you'd be stealing from honest, hard-working peoples' children by devaluing the value of their possessions.

link