Week 7: Late Critical Reading

The biggest problem in using “Economics of Property Rights” was that it was so dissimilar from every reading that I had done so far in Econ 108, for it simply seemed like an incomplete set of notes, rather than a complete, in-depth article like we read last week or the week before.  However, despite reading what felt like a law book, I felt like every little question I could possibly ask on the subject could be answered somewhere in the reading.  At one point, when wondering how this could have applied hundreds of years ago, I skipped ahead a couple of pages and found an extensive section on how the Northwest Ordinance – which I had studied heavily in high school – led to greater economic freedom to the Native Americans because they had technical American property rights.  Furthermore, I also found it interesting how the simple act of giving people rights to property  is the largest jump-starter of an economy and the best way of creating wealth, and supports a democratic society over a communist or anarchistic one.

                The first major question I have on the article is why it couldn’t have been turned into an actual essay or paper?  Just kidding.

                The first real question I’d like to ask: using the information we have learned in class and gleaned from this week’s reading, how do you think an economy work without property rights, and if it could possibly be successful?  The notes heavily talk about government interference (specifically pages 28-29) but never dive this far in.

                The second question concerns the creation of wealth: if we establish rights to everything (sections of the ocean, individual trees, individual segments of airspace, etc.) would the idea of property value decrease in worth?

                The final question I would ask concerning the reading revolves around “Anti-Commons:” how is the system faulty?  I understand that with everyone having land then demand is down and it’s hard to value it as property, but wouldn’t the distribution of land lead people exchanging the land for what they value more?

                The problem, essentially, with any system involving property rights is that it has to be absolutely concrete.  The notes we read made it clear that if there was any indication that the government or others could take away or use your land without the owner’s permission, then an economy was unable to function.  The reading, though long and tedious, helps to reaffirm the complicated results in any minor change to property rights and how government interference, as in a laissez-faire economy, is frowned upon in order to maximize economic efficiency.