The crow hides the food that does not consume immediately, taking care that his fellows do not see where he hides it.
The human repertoire of actions aimed at protecting the sources of supply of what is judged to serve one's own survival is very extensive and articulated, compiling even a first provisional list is a huge work, impossible to deal with here.
We are only at the third law, and already the interweaving of the general lines of action and of what limits them, contains them, which we have seen for the previous ones and which also recur here, in the garrison of supply sources, risks confusing our sight.
The limits set by the rules and laws, as we have seen are flexible, they depend on governments, the boundary between the conquest of supply sources and their protection is mobile: it is easy, in the simplest cases, in theory, what the individual or groups can do, it can’t violate the limit of the boundaries of property, it can’t violate the physical integrity of other human beings.
But... the boundaries of the properties are legally modifiable, according to the rules that gradually the caste defines, Chomsky docet, Stiglitz as well.
As for the physical integrity of other human beings, environmental disasters have not been invented, CO2 is not really a fairy tale, not even the extinction at a rate of thousands of species every year, of the last few decades.
And not that we don't know what we SHOULD NOT do to avoid environmental disasters, to eliminate the greenhouse effect, to preserve the variety of species: it is that, with an outstretched arm and a swinging palm, the best estimate we can make is that producing what we need to live with dignity, according to the current rules, respecting the balance with the environment, would excessively erode the profit of each activity, in fact slowing, if not blocking, the "mechanism" of accumulation that hesitates in the granitic 10%-90%.
Perhaps even forcing people to abandon activities, as they would be unprofitable, no matter if they are considered vital to the human community... the health sector is an excellent field of exploration, we will have to postpone.
And so, powerless, more or less muttering, we see continuing to allow, if not even encouraging, the use of coal, the delirious trafficking of transport of raw and half-finished materials from one continent to another, to serve production units that better guarantee the growth of profits, and the progressive spread of scissors between rich people and poor people... just to give a couple of examples.
It is not from today that in every country, in every nation, beyond what can appear from the outside, the right to property is supported and protected, and therefore, at least formally, guaranteed the protection of that right.
It is clear that no one wants to see their living space violated, our territory, more or less small for most of humanity, to be forcibly taken from what we have managed to achieve, perhaps working honestly: for90% of the world's population, the first operating limit of the protection of resource sources seems to coincide with the borders that mark the property, just as if not better than protected, of the remaining 10% of the population.
Ownership of Chinese billionaires is guaranteed: but how would Chinese billionaires exist? They're communists, no, it's impossible for them to exist. Instead, they do exist.
In the same way, the protection of the ownership of each of the citizens of the so-called evolved nations is guaranteed, regardless of the quantitative measure of ownership.
And with that, the right to do what he wants, with some limits, but relatively slack, to what we can see, and especially given the effects that are before our eyes, including everything that is needed to increase the resources, the richness at their disposal.
With what limits? Few, bland, and in time adjustable... true, there is, in many places of the world, the antitrust device, not in all, to prevent the formation of private oligopolies or private monopolies, or, as they say, the abuse of market dominance.
As we recognize there is a very strict legislation prohibiting concussion and bribery, concealment of capitals: we are full of regulations, at least we demonstrate, not everywhere, goodwill.
Regulations and laws constantly circumvented, and not by little smartass who handle a few thousand or tens of thousands of euros, eh no, we are talking of dizzying sums, we see it everyday, and we know that it is only the tip of an immense iceberg.
Just to give me some figures, I went to look for some data on the proportion between public property, at the service of all citizens, and private property, technically in the service of specific citizens: I struggled a little to orient myself in the babel of calculation methods (first answers that appear on the net), until I landed on a couple of documents understandable to me.
Let us leave alone the financial property, floating, mobile, shelling, which also constitutes a form of wealth, of the property of enormously relevant resources, much more than physical, movable and immovable assets.
The heritage of our state, the Italian state, including movable and immovable assets, cultural assets and assets of artistic value, piles about 300 billion euros: the only private real estate property piles more than 8,000 (eight thousand) billion euros.
8,000 (eight thousand) billion of which, if I am not mistaken, a recent census revealed the distribution of property: 20% (about) of Italian families officially owns 80% of the real estate. How many they are, actually, it is not given to know: in theory the law prohibits the use of figureheads, in practice, you know, things do not work like this, taxes do not really like.
Who wants to bet that, if we take into account the real owners behind the figureheads, we find 10%-90%?
I don't think we're here.
The measures taken to limit the unquestionable damage of the little or no contrasted course of action that guides humans to protect the sources of their own survival, here considered in the form of the right to private property, personal property, prove, in fact, totally inadequate, on a planetary scale.
We are dealing with private property, to the extent that it constitutes one of the quintessential forms by which the protection of the sources of survival of each individual is achieved, with the institution of private property, the rules that define its legitimate use, and the rules that are actually, really, followed..
Transfer, acquisition, transmission, and, with these, concealment, such as crows, concussion and bribery.
Seriously, do we think we can "improve" the management of the property, as it is conceived today? Seriously, do we think we can, with tenacity and determination, erase and eradicate concealment practices, corruptive and concussive practices?
In our heart, let me pass the romantic term, we know that the solution is there, and it is one and one only.