I have an economics teacher that made this claim in class yesterday. I wanted to know other people’s thoughts about it.

  • shastaxc@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    That’s like saying if there was no law against theft I could drive away with your car, and that’s not stealing. I don’t think your argument is very convincing.

    • rational_lib@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      4 days ago

      If the law said my car is no longer my property, then driving away with it would cease to be stealing, correct. What is property without legal, government-backed title? There’s no way to formulate a definition, because without government and laws property has no meaning.

      • shastaxc@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Property has existed before laws existed to enforce it. It was enforced with violence. Stealing is still stealing even if there’s no law against it.

        • rational_lib@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          And if there was a disagreement about whose property was who’s? With no laws to settle it, it would just be determined by who grabs said property and runs off with it first. That’s indistinguishable from a free-for-all.