Western vs Chinese education system

I was talking to some Chinese friends today, friends with no education in economics, and asked them whether they needed planning permission from the local authorities for building on their property. They said they do, to which I responded that we also do in my country (Australia), and they were shocked, and asked "but don't you own your property there?" (as opposed to China, where property is not owned, but leased from the government). I was at a loss for words. How is it that the explictly socialist, propoganda-laden Chinese public education system managed to produce people with a clearer understanding of property than the average public-sector economist? Maybe the propoganda in the Chinese schooling system is too obvious, and lacks the potency of subtle environmentalist indoctrination.

Thats a good question, I think it is probably more to do with the fact that the concept of ownership is native in the human psyche. Also, chinese propaganda wouldnt be designed to do the same things as western propaganda, so it would be easier for them to get an accurate appraisal of a foreign culture, at least in that respect.

and they were shocked, and asked "[...] (as opposed to China, where property is not owned, but leased from the government). I was at a loss for words

Obviously they caught you in your own cognitive dissonance. The obvious answer is "No, we don't own our property here."

Then who does own it? I guess it could be said that the Queen owns it, and in practice we're only leasing it indefinitely, but we say we own it for convenience's sake. I suppose I should just be glad that in Australia the lease really is indefinite; haha, unlike countries with inheritance and gift taxes like the US, where only half of the lease is held indefinitely, with the other half reverting back to the government when one dies or tries to gift it to someone. Any estimates on how much wealth has been destroyed by the US inheritance tax since its inception?

The Chinese also seem to be rather ambiguous about the notion of intellectual property.

I remember being harshly berated by a teacher as a kindgartner when my story book we were assigned to write bore too close a resemblance to a popular children's story about a particular mischievous monkey.

Then who does own it?

Take your pick:  local councils make you pay taxes in relation to land value and can prohibit you from having or doing certain things on 'your' property.  The State governments can make you pay taxes and can also confiscate the land.  The Commonwealth can also confiscate the land.

True. I suppose it is possible to completely own land in Australia if you homestead somewhere in the outback though, an area that has no local government and is too rural for the state to bother about. Has anyone ever considered trying to set up a free state in the outback, along the same vein as seasteading? It'd be extremely expensive to provide water and power, but then building an artificial libertarian island would also be extremely expensive. It wouldn't technically be free from the State, but State intervention could be avoided simply by not letting the State know that it exists. haha; it's not like the government regularly patrols the outback/desert looking for free states to stomp out.

As to Chinese views on intellectual property, they're probably not that different from the average westerner. The Chinese government just doesn't let the MPAA boss it into enacting intellectual property laws of which the majority of the population almost certainly don't approve, unlike western governments (how many people would vote 'Yes' on referrendum about whether to jail people who downloading copyrighted content? Not many, I'd wager.). China's government isn't separated from the judiciary, so it has no need to fear international legal pressure of the kind that the MPAA can use to bully smaller countries.

There are already some ridiculously small 'free states' in Australia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micronations 

Perhaps a Libertopia in the outback could work, but I doubt the competing Australian government would look kindly on it if it took off...

..some info to help "shape" from `illusions`,`hallucination`,`brain-pollutions`..etc ..

Meet Your Strawman http://www.yourstrawman.com/

SOVEREIGNTY AND FREEDOM

http://www.famguardian.org/Subjects/Freedom/Freedom.htm

..& very good  reads..from:

• 

  Banks-Lie-Ebook.pdf

  Size: 838.1 KB | Uploaded by Barry Kirwan

http://ebook.groupsite.com/main/summary

Fascism?

Government owned property with private property and capitalism as symbols?

Based on this criteria - is there any country in the world in which a person can own their own real estate?

Obviously you have to differentiate between ownership as it relates to control (the right to do whatever you want on it, vs not) vs financial ownership (legal claim to the property, e.g. with regards to inheritance, trespassing, right to make improvements, etc.)

Just because you need permission to do something doesn't mean you don't have the right to do it.  Otherwise one would have to claim that no one in the U.S. drives a car, because you need to have permission to do so.