Quote:
Originally Posted by gmw
Yes, a mortgage is definitely a property; they are bought and sold quite regularly. However the government didn't set the length of my mortgage, the bank and I agreed via contract, and provisions existed to change or otherwise renegotiate the length. The government did set the length of my copyright and I know they could change it without reference to me* (although I don't expect they will do so to in the immediate future) and I will arrange my situation accordingly.
* Yes, in theory my representative casts a vote on my behalf, but in reality my representative has no idea I exist.
It's all very well to get upset about property values changing outside your control, but then copyright is hardly the only example of this (eg: all those people that lost out in the housing market crash). I don't think any of us seriously expect the government will suddenly make copyright worthless. I suspect only a very few of us seriously expect government might make copyright perpetual. That copyright might extend beyond its current most common base of life+70 is feasible, but I think it is highly unlikely in most places, although I'm not placing bets on U.S.A., especially not at the moment.
|
Hold it! No, no and no.
A Mortgage is not a property. A mortgage, under law, is
a financial instrument which is secured by property. That's not the same thing. (Just like your car loan isn't property, nor your credit card debt.) In common law, a mortgage is an
estate, create by a conveyance (deed) which secures an act (repayment of lent amounts).
A Mortgage is NOT property, and please, don't conflate it with such.
Yes, they are bought and sold, just as are other instruments, which are also
not property in the sense you're trying to assign to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DiapDealer
What a government (or any other entity) can|should|may do with said property has zero bearing on whether or not it can be considered "property" (legally or etymologically). We already have different forms of property that are treated differently by governments. So you claiming a mortgage can qualify as "property" (abeit a "different kind") is well and good, but asking what that would mean in terms of potential governmental treatment of same "does not follow." It could mean anything. Just like it already does. There is no hard and fast property to government treatment formula.
|
Because, again, mortgages are not properties. They are financial instruments created by lenders. Because they are construed as being important to the citizenry, for all the obvious reasons, they are REGULATED by government, presumably to help borrowers and homeowners. Of course, we all know how that's worked out in the past, but again--not property, and subject to regulation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward
Which means there is no "hard and fast" limitation to what the government can do. . .
|
Voters determine what government can and cannot do, and if necessary, rebellion. That's the limitation. Jefferson said it best, as we all know--we get the government we deserve.
Hitch