[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
Would you agree that if a corporation has control of a politician that it becomes much easier for them to get their way?

[/ QUOTE ]
Depends on the corporation and the issue. It's somewhat easier for many, much easier for a few, and not much different for others. In terms of land exploitation under the current system vs land exploitation under all private property, it would be way, way easier for businesses to destroy for a quick profit if certain things were in private hands and regulations didn't exist. I think mining, timber and other activities overseas prove that.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, we're talking about the basic premise of AC, private property.

[/ QUOTE ]
I believe we are.
[ QUOTE ]
Have you read any of the literature and discussion on this topic, or just chose to ignore them.

[/ QUOTE ]
My points directly address the issue of environmental protection under a system of private property. I'm pointing out some of the flaws in the idealistic and unquantified AC response: "people look after their own stuff better", which to me is generally true for most classes of goods but a long way from the issues at hand. The market is really, really terrible at taking both a broad and long term view, which is needed for certain things such as environmental protection. I've read AC literature on this topic and I'm unimpressed with both the rigor and the supporting evidence. And the OP's point about being able to petition the government is a valid one.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your questions.