Which costs Clause Samples
The "Which costs" clause defines and specifies the types of expenses that are covered or reimbursable under an agreement. It typically outlines which categories of costs—such as materials, labor, travel, or administrative fees—are eligible for payment, and may set limits or require pre-approval for certain expenditures. By clearly identifying allowable costs, this clause helps prevent disputes over payments and ensures both parties have a shared understanding of financial responsibilities.
Which costs. On a Lockean-liberal account, I contend, individual ownership’s costs amount to more than ‘worsening’. Most fundamentally, these costs derive from the way in which the owner/owned-thing relation is exclusive and exclusionary, and the way in which, because these relations are protected by property rights, they impose perfect obligations on others. Perfect obligations are costly both in the sense of requiring bearers to respect correlative rights, and also in terms of the obligations’ 46 ▇▇▇▇, “▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ on Property.” 47 ▇▇▇▇, “▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ on Property.” 48 van der Vossen, “As Good As,” 184-189. burdensome content. On a Lockean-liberal account, I take the others-related costs of individual ownership to include, minimally:
1. The direct opportunities displaced when someone individually appropriates some thing: 49 i.e., any opportunities lost, by other individuals, to interact with the particular thing that has been appropriated, in ways in which they could (actually or potentially) have previously done, before it was appropriated; and also the opportunity lost to become the individual appropriator of that particular thing. These costs relate to what I call the Particularity Problem, which I shall discuss in more detail below
2. Further potential but non-necessarily consequent ‘lost’ opportunities: i.e., the opportunity lost, by other individuals, to benefit in various additional ways from being the owner of the appropriated thing — e.g., if they were to make the most of ownership, or interact with the thing as satisfactorily as the person who actually acquired it
3. The overall state of affairs, taking into consideration all other (actual and potential) ownerships: e.g., especially, the opportunity lost to others to become the owner of any particular thing, in a world in which there are finite ownership opportunities, and the opportunity lost to be of equal standing with all the people who have become owners, in a world in which nothing, or little, is left to be acquired in this manner 4. Further serious ‘others-related’ moral problems, including concerns about consent (which I shall discuss in detail below), and also the idea that individual acquisition may involve the violation of rights held by those outside the owner/owned-thing relation — including their rights to common-ownership, to a fair share of Earth’s resources, and to acquire private property 49 For present purposes, I broadly accept ▇▇▇▇’▇ interpretation above on which a Lockean view of the other...