The concept of private property is what defines the type of economic thought. There are systems that respect him a lot, others little and even others nothing. And this is due to the level of ignorance on which we settle to determine our economic preferences.
The value of things is determined by desire, which is capricious and anarchic and property is the culmination of that desire.
Desire is the source of and is inherent in Samsara, but it is precisely in Samsara itself that the economy runs. It is logical that, by extinguishing the desire, we extinguish the economy, and this truth is immovable.
For an individual to produce it is necessary to be moved by the desire to own goods or enjoy services. From this emotion, emotion as that which motivates or moves, the individual, society, its means of production are set in motion to satisfy that desire.
But satisfaction is achieved when it is achieved, that is, it is possessed or enjoyed.
From this perspective, stealing is a meaningless distortion. It steals the fruit of work, so the motivation to achieve it decreases in equal proportion.To steal is to make the attainment of desire more difficult, more expensive, more inaccessible, which makes desire decrease. If the amount of what is stolen is increased, through taxes or bank interest, the desire ends up disappearing and the individual only moves to satisfy exclusively his basic needs. The level of theft in which individuals only produce to stay alive is the optimum for economic systems based on theft. Further, they begin to lose cousins via deaths or emigration, unless they implement systems based on debt, so that, even if the cousin has nothing, he can get into debt so that even his future and that of his children and grandchildren will be stolen. .
In the first case we have societies like the Cameroonian one in which the people live just in the limit of the survival, in the second, going the robbery further, we have the western society represented by the United States or Spain, to which they They have stolen the next half century.
The Cameroonians have nothing, but they do not owe anything either.Americans have nothing and they owe everything they and their children can have. It is understood as a “rich” society, one in which the indebtedness is infinite and the hole in which it can fall is also.
Here we see that it is necessary to introduce the concept “debt” which is just the inverse of property. In itself it is absurd and economically illogical if we establish as an economic norm that of capital economy, where to invest you must first save and can only be done if you have saved first. But the bastard systems created by thieves, thieves in the pay of their own victims, the first thing they do to justify themselves is to reject desire as the discoverer of value and, therefore, of the real role of private property.
As we saw, it was the Spanish school in the sixteenth century that clearly saw that it was desire that gave value to things. However, the Calvinism of Adam Smith led him to maintain that the value of things was related to God through the “sacred” work, that is, the value is a derivation of the divine grace through the work invested in obtaining the Well, since the work is sacred, for the Calvinists, against the Spaniards who have always considered work (from the Latin tripalium, instrument of torture) as a curse of slaves and the needy. According to Smith, father of economic liberalism, the value of things is determined by the work that goes into making them.
This outrage opened the door to theft at all scales in modern societies, political imposing abusive taxes, central banks stealing the wealth and property of the people, and the concept of “debt.”
Contrary to what people think, the Spanish word “liberal” does not derive from “freedom” but was taken from the literary work of Cervantes “Don Quixote de la Mancha” where liberal translates as good people, good vibes, people cool Liberal is not someone who loves freedom, before, on the contrary, is a scavenger whose purpose is to steal property from taxes, bank interest or even national war.
The liberal understands that the economy can be planned because it does not depend on the chaotic desire, but on the parameterizable desire. So to maximize the theft the liberal always tends to decrease the value of work and increase the theft, so its goal is social inequality.
This was seen in the French Revolution, where the state grew disproportionately through confiscatory taxes and a huge army with which he tried to conquer Europe and bring his ideas liberticidas. The La Vendée rebellion between 1793 and 1796, a today hidden as “counterrevolutionary” was in the sense of trying to fight to maintain its economic freedom at the level, at least, of the Old Regime and was brutally massacred in lives and in slander, to call it “Catholic”, when it was totally false.
For a liberal, property is something relative since the value is in the work, not in it, so the State or the Bank or any organized thief can steal it with absolute impunity. Example of this we have in the current liberal systems or maximized in the neoliberals, in which the excesses of theft are not paid by thieves, but people are forced to rescue their parasites.
Marx arrives with the reasoning of the value of work to its logical conclusion: if the value is in the work the property is a robbery. Which is perfectly logical, if we take Smith’s devout stupidity for granted.
Marxist systems eliminate property and change it by perfectly regulated systems, more even than the liberals, their fellow liberticides.
Communist systems always fail for two things, if there is no property there is no desire and if there is no desire there is no motivation and if there is no motivation, the only way that the system works is from the enslavement of a part of society . That was done by Stalin or Mao in the last century and it is now Trump who does it in the United States in his penitentiary macrosystem.
Theft is in the subtraction between productivity and survival. You can steal more if you can increase productivity and decrease the level of survival. A comic case of this is the motivation programs of entrepreneurs in economically unviable nations because of their abusive level of theft: the best slave is the motivated slave.
In states in which a part of the population is unmotivated since their desire can not be satisfied and neither can they be motivated by starvation, as is the case with fixed employees whether public or private, who can not lose their job but who neither can they aspire to ascend, motivation tends to zero, as well as their productivity, so that the rest of the workers must produce for themselves and for them.
Liberals and Marxists conceive the economy in an insane mock-up based on Calvinist Christian theology whose sole purpose is the pillage, robbery, larceny, robbery, robbery, theft and fraud of property obtained in the theory of capital.
Desire can not be stuffed into formulas, nor can it be stolen without consequences.
That is the curse of kamma.
The engine of Samsara.