Thoughts. While initially I just wanted to throw here some words. I guess I should be more civilized in my word choice regarding throw. Anyways, it ended up opening up a question that has been constantly in my mind: who owns the land?

Berkeley, Friday, April 10, 2020 0:45 AM

I cannot be all the time rational 
Nor all the time irrational. 
I cannot be all the time sentimental, 
Nor all the time stupid. 

I know I should work, and I should work faster.

I have never thought I could ever use or being label with the word of laziness, and yet I refuse to surrender to that or even to use that as a reason of the current situation of getting behind with the work.

A horse with a heavy load might not be capable to walk,

yet everything can be excuses,

and all narrows down to purpose.

I never cannot do anything just by the seek of doing,

or just for fulfilling a task.

If I do a large scale study analysis,

I question who owns the land?

Not a specific land, by in philosophic principle who is the owner of the land and of the means of production.

I found a wonderful key on rerum noverandum.

Of course I do not speak latin, yet. And I am not trying to be fancy just by using a latin word, from the Encyclical Letter from Pope Leo XIII.

I left it there the Catholic Teachings on the Duties of Capital and Labor, for reference for another time.

Nor fully left nor fully right, I think that there is a lot of common sense, on people owns the land and what is produced on it.

Of course there is public land, and for example rivers belong to the state. Water belongs to the public. I would not expand further until reading some of the references below. At the end, I just wanted to write something.

Power is best if distributed, and power is on the people. The people own the land, and its outcomes need some regulation, in the seek of the common good, such as regulation of disposals, and of water use.

Yet, I do not see why the production would be trunked. I think, however, I approach the land management in agrarian terms, rather than industrial. And perhaps because we only need to survive water, food, and perhaps some kind of shelter. But if not the means of production are others in the city such as services and industry to access to the prior goods.

Centralized things are not good. While distributed power, whole mean distributed wealth, yet a system and structure is needed to growth, instead of producing chaos. This is something else to read.

And while I was not that clear above, I am convinced that is not in the duties of government to offer job generation or to demagogically offer housing. I think the government set good rules and safety to people to growth, in that process, yes, some jobs are generated for that. But the means of production belongs to and are the people’s responsibility.

I offered above a list of readings on which I am interested, but rather let me read them first, as those initial thoughts might fit or not with those readings and authors.

[I started writing in a continuous prose, as a verse. It was not displaying everything on a page, however. As the lines continued horizontally towards the right of the screen without end. Then, I converted it to paragraph, but it converted everything as one paragraph. So, I did my best in splitting it up paragraphs as I originally wrote, without further edits. I hope the fluency makes some sense.]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s