[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
pvn will just reply that the US govt couldn't legitimately buy it anyway since it was buying it with stolen money--
[/ QUOTE ]
The money was paid by the people of the USA who lived on the territory. If they don't want to pay the asking price for use of the territory, they could try to elect a new landlord, try to change the rental agreements, run for landlord themselves, or move.
If the landlord breached the agreement, they need to find someone with jurisdiction over the landlord to have their case heard. What? Nobody has jurisdiction over US legal system unless the US consents to it? Hey, sounds a lot like any corporately owned territory in ACland. They ought to try and convince people to change landlords or even the entire manner in which their rental agreements are made and enforced.
[/ QUOTE ]
A extorts money from B,C, and D, buys X plot of land with their money, and now B,C, or D are free to make A an offer for it. Makes sense.
[/ QUOTE ]
I refer to you pvn's quote here, ostensibly on behalf of ACists.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...page=&vc=1
The gist of his point in that thread was: sure, at some point in the past all of our property may have been obtained through illegitimate means but the process of unwinding all those transactions is so hard and obscure that it can't be done. Ipso facto, property rights should apply from now forward, based on what people own now.
Corollary: The government gets to keep what it has, regardless of whether of not it was obtained illegitimately in the past.