Search
Who's new
Who's online
There are currently 0 users and 16 guests online.
Frontpage FeedActive Posters
Users posting in the last 30 days:
- Praveenben - 2 posts
Navigation
User login
Recent comments
-
Anonymous (not verified):
-
Sam O'neal (not verified):
-
Maria Clark (not verified):
-
Mack Johns (not verified):
-
cheap tiffany jewelry (not verified):
-
Andrea@Christianson (not verified):
-
yashima283 (not verified):
-
yashima283 (not verified):
-
PLD (not verified):
-
Waterloo Airport Limo (not verified):
Recent Trackbacks
Popular Posts
- The Blogosphere: A Kosmos
- Workers: The Faceless, Interchangeable Cog
- Baby Steps or Cold Turkey
- Public Goods, Public Bads, and NASA
- Political Child Abuse
- Tell Me What to Do!
- Lessons from the Second City
- Economic Puzzle Involving Stock Ownership (Part II)
- Pop Culture Individualism
- Hope vs. Belief (Part II)
- Build Applications, Not Infrastructure
- May Day 2006: A Day of Remembrance
- The Hanover Street Shoe-Shine Boys
- Will the AMA Vote Against Self-Interest If I Become A Member?
- How to Combat Economic Ignorance: A Proposition
- Toward a Fallibilist Synthesis
- The Other Vouchers
- Strange Omissions
Good point. But, presumably,
Good point. But, presumably, if people wanted to live their online lives in a Lennon-esque commune with no property, then there would be an online system to support it. Instead, the consumerist Second Life is the popular platform, so it apparently appeals to more people.
(OK, I'm not sure that I buy that argument, but hey, I want to believe that when free to choose, people choose capitalism.)