I did not talk about value. I kind of agree with LTV as one perspective of why we value things, but not as a way to determine how something should be valued.See? The LTV is alive and kicking. Take that, marginalists!![]()
That sounds as if you want argue a point I've made, I haven't. Especially I didn't want to address and justify all forms of property we have in our modern society, which the example I chose and the short sentences in the end show.Nope. There's lots of other ways of obtaining it. Most rich people do not do low-skilled, labor intensive jobs. More likely they run a company that employs a lot of low skilled workers. Laborers typically get a much smaller share of the profits than management.
I just wanted to describe what in my opinion is the origin of the concept of property and how it was developed in the early stages of human civilization. It was neither meant as a political statement, nor a serious attempt at a philosophical model.
I'm aware of that. I intentionally excluded any form of division of labor because it massively complicates things for everyone involved. Again, I didn't want to address property in our modern capitalist society that has very advanced division of labor.Some hunter-gatherer tribes have communal property for just about everything. There's also passing tools down from generation to generation. There's also intellectual property involved in knowing how to make tools, but that is considered the group's knowledge not that of the individual. They do reward merit. The hunter who makes the kill gets the first choice of the meat.
Except sometimes there are things that cannot be shared, so you're really oversimplifying the issue.Property comes in a variety of forms. Really you should look at it more in terms of people who are willing to share their property and those who aren't.