I’m not sure that I want what is being advocated, exactly, but it sure is interesting to think about. The basic argument is: landlords increase the value of their land by affecting the social/physical environment of it, or in other words by attracting good neighbors and providing various useful services (or making sure they’re provided). As the size of land holdings go up, the power that the landlords wield increases, and potentially these landlords might being to provide the sorts of public services that are traditionally provided by government, and get a tax reduction for themselves and their tenants. The problem, I think, comes when you take this to an extreme; you quickly get feudalism again, with all the resulting problems. But perhaps you could do Feudalism 2.0 which didn’t actually suck, in the way that Democracy 2.0 seems to be sucking less than the first go-around.
Jerry: Today’s guests are here because they can’t agree on fundamental philosophical principles.—The Jerry Springer Philosophy Show
—Darren GreerMy father once played me the song The Night Chicago Died. I was a kid and he explained to me the events that inspired the song. I ask him—I was only eleven or twelve at the time— how a few men with guns could over-power a large crowd. “Couldn’t they just jump them?” I asked.
“They were too worried about getting killed themselves,” he told me.
