Auto:

Thanks for your input. I see it not as an effort to contrast or share your viewpoint with mine, but more, perhaps, as an attempt to erode my own by suggesting all sorts of questions I should ask about things; yet you have no idea whether I have been through your litany of questions back when I was a sophomore.

If you have specific propositions you think I have blindly taken on, or specific propositions you think I should consider, by all means lay them out. I do not need a Guide Bleu to navelgazing.

The right to own a thing is a fundamental to human exchange. The alternative is that the colony of indiivuals owns all the things, and gets to re-allocate them according to its version of wisdom. The problem with this alternative is that it erodes self-improvement, and personal, individual responsibility, as a motivation. Absent that motivation, improvement of the group becomes problematic, especially when it is not voluntary. Responsibility is never generated by other than individual will and perception, and that is perhaps my deepest assumption.

When groups are born of voluntary coordination of efforts, because the individuals subscribing to it believe in the benefits, it is a different matter, of course.

A