The Future of Wealth and Property: Limitations and Recirculation
In an ideal world, the limitations on private ownership of wealth and resources are a subject of ongoing debate. One perspective suggests that while there should be no inherent limits on personal property such as one's home, clothing, or even a swimming pool, restrictions must be placed on private property, particularly workplaces and the resources within them, to prevent exploitation.
No Limits on Personal Property but Strict Limits on Private Property
The above distinction between personal and private property is central to this argument. Personal property includes things like one's home, car, or clothes. These assets do not provide leverage for exploiting others. In contrast, private property refers to businesses, workplaces, and resources where the owner commands labor for private profit, ensuring that workers are compensated only at market rates.
In a perfect system, all wealth and resources are considered communal. Personal property is owned by individuals for personal use, while private property, which commands labor and resources, is managed by the government to ensure equal access to all resources and a fair distribution of wealth. This approach aims to eliminate disparities and create a more equitable society.
Examples of Wealth Recirculation
One of the compelling arguments against the perpetuation of private wealth is that much of it is ultimately recycled rather than locked away. For instance, the legacy of Andrew Carnegie includes not only the creation of the Carnegie Libraries but also the establishment of Carnegie Mellon University and other educational institutions. Similarly, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation have invested heavily in education, healthcare, and social initiatives, significantly impacting society.
These examples illustrate that the wealthiest individuals and families often choose to channel their resources into public good rather than monopolizing them for personal use. Such recirculation benefits society at large, enhancing educational opportunities, medical advancements, and social welfare programs.
Self-Limiting Nature of Private Wealth
The self-limiting nature of private wealth is also a significant factor in sustaining democratic ideals. A human lifetime is finite, and with limited lifespan, the possibility of wealth being passed down unchanged is remote. Additionally, the unreliability of offspring can lead to the dissipation of wealth if heirs lack the same entrepreneurial drive or ethical values as their predecessors.
More often than not, the best way to ensure the longevity of family wealth is to restrict its private ownership within the family. This is exemplified by situations where a capitalist businessman might cut their offspring out of the will because of their unscrupulous values or misguided priorities. In such cases, the wealth is donated to more conservative or community-oriented causes, effectively removing it from the realm of private ownership.
Recirculation and Resource Management
A system that promotes the recirculation of wealth ensures that resources are managed democratically. Instead of allowing one individual or entity to control all available housing, governments should hold sufficient properties to prevent monopolization by a single company or person. Basic multifamily housing should suffice, along with minimal amenities such as a computer area and a small fitness area. This measures can prevent the existence of "slum housing" and ensure everyone has access to adequate living conditions.
In conclusion, the ideal approach to wealth and property ownership involves no limits on personal property used for personal enjoyment and limited ownership of private property managed by the government. This system aims to create a fair and equitable society where all citizens have equal access to the fruits of collective labor, enhancing the overall well-being of the population. The examples of wealth recirculation and the self-limiting nature of private wealth further support the arguments for such a society.