That principle is important.

In any system where goods ( of some kind ) are not owned by the people using them, then you have to make those goods near-impossible-to-break, which is part of where communist Brutalism aesthetic comes from.

There was a book by a shelled-moluscs scientist who was born blind: he sees through his fingertips.

He's the one who pointed that principle out, having lived in communism for part of his life, & once the principle's understood, it can't be unseen.

Know somebody who cares for their tools like jewelry?

They'd all be destroyed, pronto, in communism.

That's the price that gets paid when nobody owns what they're using.

And THAT principle, means that it then becomes possible to design means-sharing-systems that can work.

The e-scooter rental systems that many cities now have, is 1 example: idiotproof, indestructible, & they enable significant improvement in the city.

But consider contractors who need to be able to get anywhere, with their tools..

public transport may break their work.

Rurally, not having a vehicle's .. often suicide.

& if the city's designed like US cities, towns, & villages, where they engineer it to break any other form of transport, then you cannot get to the supermarket without a car, from many locations.

It takes much more whole-systems orientation, to get it right, than what the US has been doing..

< shruggeth >

just some perspectives, is all..

_ /\ _