My wood......

Forster's view of owning property claims the act to be the cause of an aviricious discontentment. Is he correct? Owning possessions does seem to breed a mentality which is expectant of the maintenance of at least the original quantity of possessions while also aspiring to secure an even greater amount. This phenomenon is observed greatly in the trends that arise in a consummerism society, such as that of America, in which the richest Americans continually trend to become richer, and, in effect, the size of the lower class and the severity of their poverty grows. This poverty growth, though, is not the evil Forster describes in his essay. Instead, he focuses on the effect of the self of owning property. Its detrimental damages include the growth of desire to continually possess more, and the issue now is whether desire breeds discontentment or not. Desire can be said to be the ultimate cause of suffering, for if one does not desire to not suffer, how can they suffer of suffering? Logic seems to demonstrate that Forster is right on target.