Climate Change and the Ownership of Private Property (1 Viewer)

[TheRealTruth]

Although the paper was published in 2012, it is still very much relevant.

(PDF) Climate Change: Government, Private Property, and Individual Action

PDF | Climate change is a private property problem. Some may react strongly to such a bold claim—after all, private property is seen as a solution to... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate

www.researchgate.net

The argument that the ownership of private property is a large facilitator to climate change.

I heard some hyperbole over another story recently and ran across this more reasoned response to the problem.

Do you think there should be a global effort to reduce private property ownership as a way to facilitate real progress when it comes to the climate crisis?

 

[Beach Friends]

No. I don't trust the government to be a good steward of much of anything.

 

[Archies Ghost]

Although the paper was published in 2012, it is still very much relevant.

(PDF) Climate Change: Government, Private Property, and Individual Action

PDF | Climate change is a private property problem. Some may react strongly to such a bold claim—after all, private property is seen as a solution to... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate

www.researchgate.net

The argument that the ownership of private property is a large facilitator to climate change.

I heard some hyperbole over another story recently and ran across this more reasoned response to the problem.

Do you think there should be a global effort to reduce private property ownership as a way to facilitate real progress when it comes to the climate crisis?

Its nice to see the climate change movement finally exposing its true purpose. It is what we always knew it was, yet another redistribution scheme.

 

[Intensesaint]

Its nice to see the climate change movement finally exposing its true purpose. It is what we always knew it was, yet another redistribution scheme.

That and a means to attack capitalism. Private property ownership is a key element within capitalism. No surprise there are people advocating the removal of private property ownership in the name of climate change.

 

[samiam5211]

That and a means to attack capitalism. Private property ownership is a key element within capitalism. No surprise there are people advocating the removal of private property ownership in the name of climate change.

Tomorrow is the 156th anniversary of the greatest example of the government removing individuals private property in recorded history.

The point is that there isn't anything particularly noble about private property.

 

[SystemShock]

Do you think there should be a global effort to reduce private property ownership as a way to facilitate real progress when it comes to the climate crisis?

No, because it is not needed.

 

[SystemShock]

Its nice to see the climate change movement finally exposing its true purpose. It is what we always knew it was, yet another redistribution scheme.

That and a means to attack capitalism. Private property ownership is a key element within capitalism. No surprise there are people advocating the removal of private property ownership in the name of climate change.

Stop extrapolating to confirm your biases and misconceptions.

 

[TheRealTruth]

Its nice to see the climate change movement finally exposing its true purpose. It is what we always knew it was, yet another redistribution scheme.

This is not at all about redistribution. Because redistribution would mean the impact on the environment is still the same. So your argument is inaccurate. There needs to be a removal of private property in order to combat climate change properly. Private property ownership the way it exists in the United States leads to the type of wasteful consumerism that is taking place.

 

[TheRealTruth]

No, because it is not needed.

Please explain why it is not needed, just stating something does not make it so.

 

[coldseat]

It may help and may be necessary to truly and honestly combat climate change, but I don't see how we can ever accomplish that in the US or most other countries. Further, just talking about it scares the crap out of the right because they immediately envision some government takeover where they have no rights. So we naturally get all of these conspiracy theories and fear mongering. So it's not something that can even be discussed in rational terms with a large segment of our population, as made obvious in this thread. For that reason, I think just discussing it actually does more harm than good. I mean, we can't even get laws on carbon caps passed for pollution producing industries.

 

[SystemShock]

Please explain why it is not needed, just stating something does not make it so.

I'd think it is obvious?

I own my car. My car has a catalytic converter. It controls emissions. It's there because the manufacturer, who owns the factory in which they make their cars, put it there. They put it there because the EPA says so, under penalty of law.

How would the control of car emissions be any different if the government owned the factory and the car I drive?

 

[TheRealTruth]

I'd think it is obvious?

I own my car. My car has a catalytic converter. It controls emissions. It's there because the manufacturer, who owns the factory in which they make their cars, put it there. They put it there because the EPA says so, under penalty of law.

How would the control of car emissions be any different if the government owned the factory and the car I drive?

I'm sorry I did not clarify in my opening post, but if you had read the link I posted it is talking about Private Property in the terms of home ownership.

 

[TheRealTruth]

It may help and may be necessary to truly and honestly combat climate change, but I don't see how we can ever accomplish that in the US or most other countries. Further, just talking about it scares the crap out of the right because they immediately envision some government takeover where they have no rights. So we naturally get all of these conspiracy theories and fear mongering. So it's not something that can even be discussed in rational terms with a large segment of our population, as made obvious in this thread. For that reason, I think just discussing it actually does more harm than good. I mean, we can't even get laws on carbon caps passed for pollution producing industries.

I'm not sure what you are saying here. It seems like you believe like I do, that these changes need to happen, but you don't think they should be discussed in an open forum but rather behind closed doors? Please help me understand what you are saying.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

Its nice to see the climate change movement finally exposing its true purpose. It is what we always knew it was, yet another redistribution scheme.

Why do you think that?

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

As far as the paper, it doesn't seem to be much of anything. It does not make any actual argument about why private property is the cause, it just seems to make a correlation that the current system is based on private property and therefore, it's private property as the cause of global warming, which is pretty weak, IMO. It then fails to propose any alternative system.

I'd be more interested in hearing the OP's thoughts on the issue rather just a link to a paper.

 

[V Chip]

Really, to muster new outrage we have to go back 7+ years and dredge up some paper nobody ever heard of and has all of 83 reads?

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

Really, to muster new outrage we have to go back 7+ years and dredge up some paper nobody ever heard of and has all of 83 reads?

I once read a comment on the internet that said we needed the wall built to prevent the mongrelization of the white race, is that proof that the right is showing its true colors and the illegal immigration issue is really about white nationalism? It had more than 83 likes.

 

[TheRealTruth]

As far as the paper, it doesn't seem to be much of anything. It does not make any actual argument about why private property is the cause, it just seems to make a correlation that the current system is based on private property and therefore, it's private property as the cause of global warming, which is pretty weak, IMO. It then fails to propose any alternative system.

I'd be more interested in hearing the OP's thoughts on the issue rather just a link to a paper.

I believe it has to do with over consumption. Private home ownership leads to people buying things to fill those homes, in many cases much more square footage than needed. Imagine how much less of an impact on the environment there would be if there were no private property ownership in the form of houses. This leads to move people living in city centers where public transportation can be used rather than inefficient cars.