No one claims he owns the land of Mars. From the land ownership in Mars no wealth generates, not profittable. Indeed land ownership doesn't mean much if it has nothing to do with producing wealth. Alaska was purchased from Russian in relatively little money because the land was thought to be less productive, only later after it turned out to produce crude oil, the value went to astronomically high.
Although a land was claimed to be owned by someone, unless produced anything, it is as good as waste, thus waste land has scarece value.
A poor father told his sons at his death, 'I hid a treasure box somewhere in this vast land now we see, unfortunately I forgot the site, my sons dig and find' then he died.
His sons kept on digging every nook and crany day and night, year by year, but they were unable to find the treasure box.
Years later the land they dug was so cultivated that it could produce lots of crops, that enabled them to have enough wealth eventually. Then they realised real wealth was their labour.
The land that generates fewer wealth is not worthy to someone who just owns the land. The land ownership has to be measured by its degree of public utility. Here 'public' means to be beneficial to the general 'public' as many as possible. If it were not used profittably well, someone's ownership has to be replaced by another who can come up with more wealth, it doesn't matter whether it's public or not.
Who owns the land? Its ownership is to leave to those who make the most of the land.
-The inserted anecdote is not my invention, I read somewhere in the past.
No comments:
Post a Comment