The comment I was replying to was talking about the growth of the economies and society progress. It's not about owing, it's about what is happening - and I think we agree that if the goal of everybody in a society is to live a quiet life, there will be no progress. Maybe we'd even witness the contrary: a regress of said society, to the extent we can call sparse people living by themselves in the woods a "society". If that sounds negative and you feel the need to defend it, it's maybe because you actually agree it's a negative for the society. While being good for the individual, right.
> and I think we agree that if the goal of everybody in a society is to live a quiet life, there will be no progress
That's actually where it gets really interesting though. Progress isn't absolute, it's relational and requires first defining the goal. If one's goal is to live a quiet life where they minimize their dependence on others, living in a cabin in the woods and finding their solution for food and water is progress. That obviously doesn't fit for a larger society where the goal is generally increasing dependence and trust on the larger society, but neither is right or wrong.
If one's goal is to live a quiet life where they minimize their dependence on others, it is incumbent on them to figure out how to keep anybody who wants what they have from just coming in and taking it. That requires a society. Your deed to your land is civilization. Part of societal progress is making it so that deed can be trusted to keep people from just taking your cabin in the woods and throwing you out.
This has to be negotiated with the people who would want to take your cabin in the woods and throw you out.
