[Kylon]

I was thinking about what will happen when American government can no longer exert pressure on countries to maintain ownership of properties owned by financial entities in the United States.

The financial class seems hell bent on outsourcing everything, and shipping capital and jobs overseas. As the jobs go and the capital goes, so does the tax revenue. As the tax revenue goes, the United States won't have the political, economic, or military power left to exert force on countries that violate the property rights of U.S companies.

We are already seeing the United States losing it's ability to project force around the world, as well as losing status. If the United States loses the ability to project power enough, then you might end up with peak property rights.

Therefore, in many ways, U.S capitalist, and the U.S financial class are undermining their long term wellbeing.

What does everybody think?

[Pops]

OPEC came about because the US couldn't protect the assets of the Seven Sisters.

But I'm not really sure how you got from projecting power overseas to ownership of property here. The psychological underpinning of the US really is property rights and home ownership. Many europeans came here as indentured servants and were paid for their servitude with property, which meant full citizenship - that has been the dream since the beginning. It has been pointed out as the reason north america developed so much faster than south. In the North "the government" killed the natives and gave away land for immigrants to work for their own profit. In the south the government kept the land and put the natives and immigrants to working it for the "government's" profit.

The more likely scenario is that owning a home will be less and less affordable if credit dries up or the mortgage tax deduction is be eliminated. Great power lies with the monied interests and I'd be pretty surprised to think the government could ever take that away. AmericanDream's dream scenario would be the only way for property rights to be completely eliminated.

[Kristen]

I don't think the US government protects property owned by businesses outside it's borders and am not aware of a case when we have. Clearly our embassies are protected, but an oil rig owned by Exxon? They probably use Xe or some other dark outfit that provides private security.

[KaiserJeep]

Even with the latest reductions brought about by Obama, the US military exceeds in size and capability the next largest 12 countries:



In terms of power projection, we have still got 9 operational Carrier Battle Groups, which exceed in capability all the CBG's of all other countries combined. This is down from 13 CBG's during the Cold War.

We have operational stealth bombers capable of striking invisibly anywhere in the world, and returning to the US mainland afterwards.

We have more operational attack submarines than the rest of the world combined.

I think the rest of the world is disarming faster than the US, and the balance of power is unlikely to change.

[Pops]

Yet we were attacked for the first time in the middle of our largest city at one of the symbols of our power with a couple of box cutters, we just lost our two longest wars with the most backward countries on the planet, China is invading the computers of US companies on an ongoing basis and your power was very nearly cut off by a few rifle rounds last year.

Having the largest conventional force only guarantees we will be attacked unconventionally.

[KaiserJeep]

Don't confuse an unwillingness to use military force with a weak military. The weak and sniveling Democratic political leadership we have now is busily sucking up to other countries in the hope that they will like us rather than hate us.

It isn't ever going to happen. The world's only remaining superpower will always be hated. Even by those who enjoy life and liberty won by American blood and treasure. It was instructive to watch the demonstrations in France by those who want to build upon the land occupied by the American cemetery at Normandy.

[Pops]

Don't confuse an unwillingness to use military force with a weak military.

You're replaying WWII or maybe even Manifest Destiny in your head while other countries look at our jingoism and laugh as they spend their money on windmills and PV and mass transit.

We just spent trillions and thousands of lives trying to extend the empire of Halliburton and have nothing to show for it as a nation except debt.

hooah

[Subjectivist]

As far as I can tell from the history books property rights have never been anything more or less than what the government in controll of an area chose it to mean. In the middle ages inheritence was both revered and enforced, until the powers that be changed to different powers. Often the new powers kept enforcing the old rules as a way to stabilize their own position of authority. As far as the Globe is concerned until World War Two mght made right and the winners made the rules. In a lt of places this is still the case, like Siagon Viet Nam, the south lost and the North united he country under their set of rules in the late 1970's. In Venezuela just a few years ago the Government chaged and the meaning of Property Rights changed with it. There is no one Global defenition of Property Rights, only regional and local.