This is an excerpt from a longer exposition on economics and politics which I'm still outlining.
In a Robinson Crusoe situation where it takes one day's labor to procure one day's resources one may be willing to do without for a day in order to improve one's method of procurement. If one is subsisting on fruit with either a thick stem or heavy rind one may decide to do without food one day and use the time not spent gathering and consuming fruit to fabricate a sharp stone tool which would enable the procurement of one day's food in half a day. One deems the present sacrifice acceptable for future gain. From that one period of time expended every subsequent day produces half the value of that single day. In two days one would have recovered all one had given and every day after one gains half as much again.
Given now the surplus time, one could choose to work all day to procure twice as much food in anticipation of future need or use that time for leisure or further utilization of resources and time to increase productivity, comfort and surplus time. In this way one has alone converted time, energy and resources, each exclusively controlled, into items of subjective material value to oneself. In this way one has created wealth to which no other can have claim as no other contributed to its production and accumulation. Wealth so acquired can scarcely be considered other than inviolable. Its disposition is subject to none but the owner.
arraign - verb tr.: 1. To call or bring a defendant before a court to hear and answer a criminal charge. 2. To criticize, accuse, or censure.
4 hours ago