Oh, let us not readily believe that Ricardo, Say, Malthus, and Rossi, such eminent and well-founded minds, are mistaken. But let us not, either, lightly admit a theory that leads to such monstrosities.
Value is determined after bargaining between two contracting parties.
It is perhaps not idle to point out that laws of this nature are iniquitous and disastrous, whatever may be the opinion of either oppressed or oppressor toward them.
Thus, Jonathan learned that, under a system of liberty, not everyone who will may become a monopolist.
Economists, socialists, egalitarians, all direct the same reproach against landed property, that of charging for something that it has no right to charge for.
Every man OWNS LEGITIMATELY THE THING which his labor, his intelligence, or, more generally, HIS ACTIVITY HAS CREATED.
In other words, the workman and the entrepreneur are paid, in the name of justice, for services that they render; the landowner is paid, in the name of the law, for services that he does not render.
And I say, as emphatically as I know how: Property is not a privilege.
Communism destroys liberty, for it permits no one to dispose freely of his own labor.
It is not the principle of property that must be attacked, but, on the contrary, the principle hostile to it, the principle of spoliation and plunder.
It increases or decreases according to the fluctuations of supply and demand, that is, according to the particular pressures of the moment and the general prosperity of society.
It is not granted to any man to arrive at the outermost limits of knowledge. Scholars climb upon one another’s shoulders to explore a horizon that keeps on extending farther and farther.
They did not seek out learned economists; there were none in the locality. But they chose just men with common sense, which amounted to the same thing: political economy, justice, and common sense are one and the same.
…when it is generalized, protectionism becomes communism, just as carp fry become adult carp…
When I see labor growing angry with capital, I seem to be seeing starvation rejecting food.
I will draw to your attention here that when you analyze the notion of property, it is irrational and dangerous to make this word a synonym of opulence and in particular of ill-gotten opulence.
Since Rousseau was convinced that the social state was a human invention, he had to place law and the legislator on a high pedestal.