4,304 comments posted · 405 followers · following 26
But to further my reasons, the opportunity cost will be present regardless of how the land was obtained. Whether the current user/occupant has it taken by force, or whether she gives it up willingly (as in trade for some other land), or even if she abandons it completely and migrates to Patagonia, the lost use of the land remains. So, the issue then is not the lost use, but the manner in which the use was lost.
Actually, no. The issue still is the lost use. The fact that there's various ways for this use to be lost is fairly irrelevant. The fact remains that as long as the land is taken permanently, everyone else in the word loses.
But where the fuck do you worms keep coming from?