• Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    15 hours ago

    There’s a limit on how much stuff you can “own” and actually use. If you don’t use it, you don’t own it anymore.

    • Ace T'Ken@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      usufruct

      So… reading the Wikipedia article on it for more info, it doesn’t seem to place any limits on what you can own. It simply lets you makes allowances for others to use something of yours. It doesn’t seem to mention forfeiting unused property in the least.

      It’s basically just being a landlord, but with other stuff, no? I’m not following how this isn’t corruptible unless there’s something I’m missing.

      • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 hour ago

        This paragraph is vital:

        A usufruct is either granted in severalty or held in common ownership, as long as the property is not damaged or destroyed.

        This means that most things aren’t owned by one person (legal or natural).

        Being a landlord is based on the third property relation:

        The third civilian property interest is abusus (literally abuse), the right to alienate the thing possessed, either by consuming or destroying it (e.g., for profit), or by transferring it to someone else (e.g., sale, exchange, gift).

        Abusus isn’t only about destroying, but also about keeping something from being used (A landlord can keep me from living in their house, unless I pay them).

        If you don’t have the abusus right, you simply can’t keep others from using things. Which is why most property would be held in common. Think of it like a big library for everything. Not only books, but bikes, pots and pans, tools, furniture and accomodations.

        This podcast is how I know of the concept