Property rights.

The reason I reject outright the notion that property rights have an ethical component that shares most of the salient features of their legal expression is because I reject the basis for someone's claim on property as not justified in itself. The basis of any person's current claim is the prior claim of someone else from whom that person received the property by purchase or bequest. Inevitably, this claim regresses to a claim that is merely "finders, keepers" (presuming all transactions are valid). Thus it seems difficult to hold that this is the basis of any sort of natural right to a particular property. Rather, property rights are justified through Coase: any given distribution is just as good as any other, if transaction costs are low and bargaining does not fail.

Share this