>>107
No, what's happening around the world is that those with a strong special interest presence in the government gets what they want, those that doesn't gets nothing. And if any compromises were made, they are between politicians and lobbyists behind closed doors cutting deals among themselves.
The example I presented with river was just to illustrate that conflict of interest is inevitable with any property that is deemed to be owned by everyone at the same time. If you want to talk about how these conflicts will actually play out in the real world, that's a completely different story, and a grim one.
If private property policies were established in the river example, there would be no conflict to start with. Everyone who lives beside the river owns the strip of the river beside their house. Whatever others do with their strip is their business, as long as it doesn't affect your strip (upstream polluting down stream..etc.). Person B wouldn't have any claim over what person A does with his strip to begin with, there would be no ground for conflict.