October 25, 2026
By Stephen Stofka
Last week I looked at the persistent controversies within generations alive at the same time. This week, I want to explore the continuing tension between government institutions and the individuals who are subject to the jurisdiction of those institutions. Are we living in a nation of liberal principles or a dog park where the big dog, government, intimidates the little dogs?
Private Property
When the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, residents of Russia were introduced to private property for the first time in 500 years. Just as the feudal system was weakening in the late 15th century, Ivan the Great had consolidated the Principality of Russia. Before then, many peasants were used to moving every three years in a system of slash and burn agriculture. The introduction of a feudal system enabled large estate owners to tie their workers to the land they owned. By the time of the American Declaration of Independence, the Russian feudal system had evolved into a system of near slavery. As the American Civil War erupted in 1861, Czar Alexander II emancipated the privately owned serfs of Russia (Source).
Why do nations permit individuals to own property? The majority of wealth held by Americans is in their home equity. Governments could lease those homes out to families and retain the implied wealth. In an agricultural society, the feudal lords used their serfs to farm the land. In our urban society, local governments farm people, not land. Wait, what?
This is a weekly exploration, an unraveling of thought threads so I am going to follow this one. Homeowners work for a variety of employers and earn income. Local governments get more in taxes per acre of land if people rather than crops live on the land. Taxing people is more lucrative than taxing crops. At the end of this essay, I have included the math on owning a home.
We may point to the 5th Amendment as an acknowledgment of the supremacy of private property but the 5th Amendment prohibits governments only from taking an individual’s property without just compensation. A government’s right to someone property is still supreme.
Cultivated Minds
Farming people requires more government investment per acre, similar to hydroponic farming. Crowding more people into an acre of land, requires more thorough weed control and cultivation. For weed control, governments use vaccines and other public health measures to check the spread of communicable diseases. The chief cultivation measure is public education.
As I noted two weeks ago, almost half of people lived on farms near the turn of the century. In 1900, only 10% of children attended high school. By 1930, only 25% lived on farms (Source). In those three decades, the percentage of children attending high school jumped from 10% to 50%. By 1940, it was almost 75% (Source). A continuing source of friction and resentment between parents and government is the idea of compulsory education. Parents, particularly those with a Biblical view of authority, regard the parents as the supreme authority over their children’s upbringing, not the government.
Education plays a role similar to fertilizer, weed control and cultivation. How so? A better educated workforce earns more income and can pay higher taxes. Public education socializes children at an early age and helps create a shared culture. This helps reduce violence among families from different cultural backgrounds who are tightly packed into dense urban areas. This
In 2025, the USDA estimated that fertilizer costs were about 40 – 45% of total costs for wheat and corn farmers (Source). The largest share of property taxes funds the local school district (Source – Power Schools). In my Colorado county, 49% of the tax is dedicated to various school funds.
In any community there are individuals who do not like to be “farmed.” Government institutions and programs try to standardize us the way that carrots, each of which is unique, is shaped, cut and polished to a standard baby-cut 2” length (Source).
Private schools can provide more rigorous educational standards or a learning culture that parents feel is more nourishing for their children. Naturally, they want their private choice to be funded with public dollars. If a state spent $10,000 per child on K-12 education, then a parent could apply a voucher for that amount to a private school. Currently, two-thirds of states have some form of school voucher but few have a truly universal voucher program that allows any family to fund a private school choice with public funds (Source).
Conclusion
In some respects governments act like feudal lords. A core tenet of liberal theory, first clearly articulated by the 17th century philosopher John Locke, is that people have natural rights. In a democracy or republic, government institutions are formed with the direct or indirect will of the people. Therefore, those institutions would also have natural rights. Big dog v. little dog and the big dog wins.
Next week I want to explore a fundamental libertarian belief that the scope of legitimate government power is very limited. In more than four decades, the Libertarian Party barely attracts any voter support. Is it an overly idealistic philosophy that rests more on attitude than consistent workable principles?
/////////////////////
Photo by Alvan Nee on Unsplash
////////////////////
Homeowner Math: Consider a $500,000 home with a $400,000 mortgage and an annual property tax bill of $3000. In the first ten years of that mortgage, the amount of the mortgage payment that is applied to principal is less than the annual property tax bill.
Over decades, the annual price appreciation of homes has been about 4% so that a home’s price doubles in about 18 years. Let’s call it 20 years to make the math a bit easier. After 20 years, the value of that $500,000 home will have doubled to $1 million. The homeowner still owes $222K on the mortgage after paying $600K over that time, so the net equity is $778K.
Let’s say the homeowner has made $78K in improvements to make the math easier. If the house sold for $1 million after fees, the capital gain would be $700K. If the owners are a couple, they would have a $500K exclusion and a taxable gain of $200. Let’s say the capital gains tax rate is 15%, or $30000.
In those twenty years, the homeowner has paid the original $100K down, $600K in mortgage payments, $78K in improvements, $90K in property taxes and $30K in income taxes for a total of almost $900K. They have received the use of the house for 20 years and have netted $100K. However, that $100K is worth only $50K in buying power. Was the homeowner truly the landlord?
