This type of property no luck, since the development of human society required a mass conversion to form "composite work" in the words of Karl Marx. One of them was capitalism, others – socialism. The question of transition small producers directly to socialism still remains controversial in science, but it is obvious that the decisive argument in favor of such a transition can only be economic arguments – an advantage in pace improve productivity in the first place. At first glance it may seem that it is only the replacement of labels: "row" to "property", etc. The real question is much more serious, might not require a change of label, and shift in emphasis, and this implies, and a very important practical consequences. First of all, avoiding the use of concepts of individual and collective property rights in cases where it actually exists (Earth – in the possession and use of the collective farms, apartments – in the possession and use of citizens, etc.), we eliminate the legal basis for imposing liability for the safety of public property to owning and using them to private individuals – ie, the pin losses from property damage caused by it to the state as a whole, thus violating his rights as the ultimate owner of all means of production in socialist society. If, however, recognize that the means of production and other assets are transferred to producers in the operational ownership under the guarantee of their full responsibility to society as a whole, the charge compensation of possible damage immediately and definitely will be assigned to producers – up to research from the loss of their personal income and property.
Karl Marx Property
