"Do you mind if we play through?"
Putting Proper back in “Property” – Part 9
What might cause somebody to say that another has too much? One case where this might be reasonable is in the “limited pie” scenario. Six friends are playing poker, and they order a large pizza to be delivered. It shows up and, as is usually the case, is cut into 12 equal pieces. If one guy eats 3 pieces, assuming that each friend paid equally, he has taken too much. Of course, adjustments could be made – maybe somebody wants only 1 piece, and the heavy eater and the light eater can work out how much the one owes the other.
In the context of property, property rights, and ownership, we distinguish between several types of goods to analyze how markets and prices work. If we are talking fungible goods, meaning ‘freely exchangeable or replaceable,’ we treat one pound of this as equivalent to one pound of that, or one item of this as equivalent to one item of that (e.g. wheat, oil, iPhones, General Electric toasters, money). Can somebody accumulate too much of a fungible good?
To answer this fairly, we might ask if there is harm in one person acquiring a very large number of such items – i.e. ‘stockpiling.’ What is the negative effect on immediate neighbors and, perhaps, distant persons? There are countless examples of people holding large quantities of various fungible goods, with no ill effects. Farmers, ranchers, and construction operations will routinely buy 5,000- or 10,000-gallon tanks of gasoline to make remote operations easier with their cars, trucks, tractors, and other equipment. This does nobody any harm – and has no ill effect on the price of gasoline. I know somebody who collects Beanie Babies – an absurd and idiotic item to collect, frankly – but this has had no ill effect on anybody, other than the fact that she has had to devote one entire closet to her collection … and “wasted” (in my opinion) several thousand dollars over a 20-year period.
The Hunt brothers, of Arkansas and then Texas, once tried to corner the market on silver (1979-1980), presumably to drive the price up such that they could then make huge profits, through silver futures or in a careful sell-off. They bit off more than they could chew, though, and their plan backfired and they filed for bankruptcy. There are collectors who own hundreds of guitars, hundreds of cars, hundreds of paintings, etc. Is your life negatively affected by these collectors … or hoarders? In one small way, perhaps. Maybe they take unique artistic creations “out of circulation,” and this disables your enjoying it … except perhaps by way of a photograph, a news story, or an encyclopedia article.
There are, in fact, world-famous, classic works of art – sculptures and paintings – that are owned privately. Most of these, thankfully, seem to find their way into museum exhibits, under the beneficence of their owners. Some highly valued works of art are kept fully private. Can I feel the pain of this private holding? Frankly, no, but some might say they do. Viewing specific art is not a natural right. That right comes at the cost of either creating the art oneself, purchasing it from another creator, or being allowed to see it by a benefactor, such as a museum (which might require the purchase of a ticket to see the exhibit).
When a person proclaims that somebody else has too much, or owns too much, or took too much, this usually indicates an issue of jealousy or envy on the part of the speaker. It also usually indicates ignorance and confusion about the infinite nature of reality. It generally has nothing to do with the actual availability of the goods, services, items, etc. Although at any instant in time, the number of houses on Earth is finite, home ownership is not a limited pie scenario. Architects, construction companies, contractors, day laborers, lumber companies, steel companies, furniture companies, plumbing supply stores, paint stores, carpet manufacturers, and furniture stores abound that are ready and willing to sell you a newly designed, constructed, and furnished home. All YOU need to do is come up with the cash or a decent loan.
Money, too, is one of these fungible ‘materials.’ As you earn, acquire, and save more … in your investments or bank accounts, the effect on others is negligible. In other words, there is plenty of money in the world – even with the number of billionaires now numbering in the hundreds.
Ultimately, then, it seems that when somebody is said to have “too much” of something, it is a matter of opinion. Some of the fault some people may find in others’ owning or acquiring “too much” is aesthetically based. When I visit a vacation community, whether at the beach or in the mountains, and I see tens and hundreds of expensive homes just sitting there vacant, it triggers my critical nature. I think, “Hmmm … what a waste.” If I pick one at random, and I find out that the owners use that “second home” regularly, I feel better and assured somehow – as if the owners and I agree that it is better to use (and enjoy) what you have, to as high a degree as possible. If, on the other hand, I hear from the main residents in a vacation community that the owners of a particular house rarely come and stay, I am saddened. In my view such owners, even in their presumed wealth, exhibit a peculiar kind of lacking and deprivation: the inability to fully utilize and appreciate their property.
Do my subjective responses to the frequency of usage of property by others present a legal claim? No, of course not. My sense of aesthetics informs me, however, that the healthier and more respectful a society is, the more consistently and fully a given individual uses the resources he/she has created, and the better he/she maintains and cares for them.
