Singapore doesn't have property rights btw and is doing just fine.
A few random points/opinions:
I think the USA did pretty darn good when they got independence and I doubt everyone had an IQ above 130. Now imagine what can be done with the internet and bitcoin.
Isn't Dubai like 90% foreigners? It's basically a city that was built up in the middle of nowhere, populated by people with different backgrounds from around the world. The low amount of government economic interference and low taxes did wonders to attract them. I believe the world is actually becoming more decentralized and competitive, I see smaller countries forming in the future and that sounds like a spark of hope for the libertarian types. A world full of hundreds of Liechtensteins competing for labor and brainpower, doing what is best to improve their wealth and position in the world. Then everyone copying the methods that work best.
When the high IQ people invent new gadgets that improve quality of life, people adopt them in mass, dumb or smart. I think property rights is another one of these gadgets/tools, but it's a gadget being held back by many governments around the world. Once allowed to be unleashed, the masses will follow, they don't have to understand how it works, only that it works.
So yeah, maybe anarcho capitalism or libertarianism is not possible (for now) but it's a great bar to aim for, history favors those geographic locations that have embraced free markets and property rights to the highest extent. Ultimately, anarcho capitalism doesn't promise utopia, it simply offers the best possible mechanism to mitigate the formation of authoritarian controls upon a population. Bitcoin and the internet allows the productive modern man to vote with his feet and to help shape and foster communities of like minded people around the world.
nostr:npub1uw6lgv5qyexx68fwgdmwt3w7v3dwv679sray2ncpkug70ad7a8gqut3tay any thoughts? I'd like to hear your take on this.
Discussion
If you're referring to the state owning all the land, then yes, but it's the same case everywhere. Once you've signed your deal with the state, there's pretty robust property right protection laws. Basically, the only thug in town is the Singapore government but they'll let you carry about your economic business and you don't have to worry about other thugs coming in and destroying/stealing everything.
Some governments protect property rights better than others. Those that do it best and allow decent amount of economic freedom tend to boom.
It's not the same everywhere. In Singapore you can only rent property from the government on a 49 or up to 99 year lease. Everywhere else you buy it you own it for eternity.
It seems to be working for Singapore.
You don't own it for eternity if you stop paying taxes on it, so the main difference is that in Singapore it's a lease with a set time limit, and everywhere else it's a lease without a time limit, try not paying your taxes in either system and you can say goodbye to your property no matter how long you've had it.
The big difference though is that Singapore will protect your property rights better than in other cities such as London, Chicago, etc. Nonetheless Singapore didn't just boom because of better protection of property rights but also because of it's looser economic policies and the government not trying to centrally plan absolutely everything. Did they do this? Yes, like every governmemt to different extents, but the intervention here was less than in most other countries. My point being, the more libertarian/free market leaning a geographic area is, the better the economic outcome is, generally.
Correct what with the taxes but they're generally very low. In some jurisdictions you don't pay property tax on your primary residence.
Property taxes don't usually represent the economic value of the property, rent does. So you can buy it and rent it out and profit from the difference.