I'm surprised that no one has commented on the validity of (moonbase) air as a commodity. If you have to decide to let one of your children die because you can't pay the air bill, something is fundamentally wrong with the definition of property.
Sure you can pay for air today, but it's always for non-standard purposes. SCUBA, industrial, CO2 cartridges for flats, etc.
We've already gone down this road with respect to water. The cost of manufacturing bottled water far exceeds the cost of having clean water on tap. Corporations (Bechtel) have even tried to make rainwater collection off of roofs illegal.
My point being that if you are going to define property, you should make an effort to define between (what should be) non-divisible communal property and private property.
Whoa there. People, especially children, die every day because they can't afford food, clean water, or vital medical care [1]. So, are all of those suddenly communal property in your world? Who gets to decide how much of each of those resources each person deserves? Saying a commodity is "invalid" just because children are dying from not having it quickly leads to absurd situations like making organs communal property. What should be communal vs privately owned is contested every day at every level of government--this is a complex issue with no simple standards that can be universally applied.
Sure you can pay for air today, but it's always for non-standard purposes. SCUBA, industrial, CO2 cartridges for flats, etc.
We've already gone down this road with respect to water. The cost of manufacturing bottled water far exceeds the cost of having clean water on tap. Corporations (Bechtel) have even tried to make rainwater collection off of roofs illegal.
My point being that if you are going to define property, you should make an effort to define between (what should be) non-divisible communal property and private property.