Talk:Personal property

message: "The term personal property is also used with meanings that have no connection to the above. Specifically, Marxism and Anarchism draw a distinction between personal property and private property." ..and the rest of the section that is based on that.  Source? RJII 16:03, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Still waiting on a source for this. I'm not sure, but it looks like someone made it up off the top of their head. RJII 01:23, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I can see, it is perfectly consistent with the views of anarchists (of the libertarian socialist variety, at least), and the views of communists regarding the form of the communist society they ultimately wish to create. I will look for definite sources, however. -- Mihnea Tudoreanu 16:14, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I found this: http://question-everything.mahost.org/Socio-Politics/Property.html and modified the section accordingly. I don't know who wrote it or if it counts for anything. It looks like the writer is defining "personal property" the way Proudhon defined "possession" when it came to natural resources. I don't know if it's just one guy with this definition or whether there are any authoritative sources on this. It's not standard among anarcho-communists. For example, this CNT-FIA pamphlet urging anarchist revolution: "To the people. The CNT and FAI call everybody to armed revolt. The hour of revolution has struck and the moment is here. We stand ready to make anarcho-communism a reality. Personal property is abolished, and all wealth will be collectivized..." RJII 16:31, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not acceptable to just source it to somebody's website. If you can pull that definition directly from the sources quoted by that website, then we'll have something verifiable; until then, I've deleted the section. -- nae'blis 00:12, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Source requested

message: I created a redirect from the above to this article. If anyone feels this is incorrect feel free to expand the above link into an article. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 00:35, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Personal estate]]

message: Can someone clarify this more? Accountants also distinguish personal property from real property because personal property can be depreciated faster than improvements (while land is not depreciable at all). It is an owner's right to get tax benefits for chattel, and there are businesses that specialize in appraising personal property, or chattel. I find this part confusing; surely both in economic terms and in real-life, real property also often depreciates. I don't understand this part, can someone clarify what they mean by depreciate here, because they don't mean the economic definition that is linked.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.251.208.12 (talk) 11:00, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Clarification Requested

message: As chattel redirects here there are probably extra areas that need to be covered - for example the use of the term chattel to refer to slaves, which I think traces back to Abolitionism. --86.179.186.239 (talk) 17:54, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: From Online Etymology, "chattel (n.) early 13c., chatel "property, goods," from Old French chatel "chattels, goods, wealth, possessions, property; profit; cattle," from Late Latin capitale "property" (see cattle, which is the Old North French form of the same word). Application to slaves (1640s) is a rhetorical figure of abolitionists, etc.". See also Wikipedia page on Chattel marriage.Ermadog (talk) 04:08, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chattel 

message: See the second bullet point in the section "Personal versus private property".
This: "Private property is a social relationship between the owner and persons deprived (not a relationship between person and thing), e.g., artifacts, factories, mines, dams, infrastructure, natural vegetation, mountains, deserts, seas, etc." puzzles me: artifacts, factories, etc, are things not persons. 31.52.252.177 (talk) 10:52, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I presume it is referring to the person who is denied access or use of the property, but I agree it is not well explained. Iapetus (talk) 15:05, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Person vs. thing 

message: Makes it sound like other kinds of property are not social relationships between the owners and the persons deprived. Exclusion is always a reality. Some users and uses will be excluded, no matter what arrangement we choose.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.171.156.208 (talk) 00:42, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Private property is a social relationship between the owner and persons deprived 

message: @ 103.111.225.183 (talk) 23:03, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Life_%28album%29?wprov=sfla1q