Anthony de Jasay’s book The State may be his most recognized work, but it is not an easy read. So I went looking for more material to get a quicker fix on what he is all about. About twenty years ago he wrote about his house and his dog. It was a way to point out that the household members have a special claim on the home that outsiders do not. I like to think that the contenance and use of the home is a public good to its residents, dogs included.
De Jasay goes a step further to point out that others could possibly have claims to the home based on the neighborhood activities. The firefighters provide safety and the city infrastructure pipe in water and pipe out waste. Here again we have public goods being provided but instead of the line for insiders and outsiders being at the exterior walls of the home they are in a ring around the city or suburb or municipality.
More thought is needed fully to unravel the question of who owns your house, and indeed the question of who owns anything. If there were no fire brigade, the whole street might have burned down and your house would no longer stand. The fire brigade has contributed something to its value, and some figure ought to be put against their name. The utilities should not be forgotten, for how would you like to live in a house without running water, electricity and so forth? Some tentative numbers had better be credited to them. Surely, however, you cannot just ignore the builder who erected the house, the lumberman, the brick factory, the cement works and all the other suppliers without whom the builder could not have erected it. They too must have their contribution recognized, even if it must be done in a rough-and ready fashion.
But the best part of what de Jasay has to say is that the settling of accounts occurs at time of transaction.
Once this is understood, we can move on to the major point. All contributions of others to the building of your house have been paid for at each link in the chain of production. All current contributions to its maintenance and security are likewise being paid for. Value has been and is being given for value received, even though the “value” is not always money and goods, but may sometimes be affection, loyalty or the discharge of duty. In the exchange relation, a giver is also a recipient, and of course vice versa.




























































































