Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: May 1, 2025
What moral right to exclude others is gained from being the first? Nozick advanced Locke's Proviso. An exclusive ownership of property is just only if "enough and as good is left in common for others". If it does not worsen other people's lot, exclusivity is morally permissible. It can be argued, though, that all modes of exclusive ownership aggravate other people's situation.
In economic environments with compromised and impaired trust, loyalty decreases and mobility increases. People switch jobs, renege on obligations, fail to repay debts, relocate often. Concepts like exclusivity, the sanctity of contracts, workplace loyalty, or a career path all get eroded. As a result, little is invested in the future, in the acquisition of skills, in long term savings.
Some scholars raise the issues of exclusivity and scarcity as the precursors of property rights. True but not relevant. In other words, exclusivity and scarcity do not constitute property rights or even lead to their establishment. On the contrary, it is surprisingly easy to think of numerous exceptions to a purported natural right of single access to one's brain.
As far as everyone, bar the entrepreneur, are concerned, exclusivity also prevents a more advantageous distribution of income and wealth. Exclusive ownership reflects real-life irreversibility. A first mover has the advantage of excess information and of irreversibly invested work, time, and effort.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking