Huge disparities in income and fortune are considered to be causal for severe handicaps in food situation, health, education, and social security of underprivileged people. Are changes of or amendments to the prevailing property system as e.g. reconnaissance of social liability or democratic participation likely to alleviate these impacts? As an introduction, the philosophical and historical background is provided, followed by the description of how neoliberalism works in theory and reality. Finally, examples of the existing injustice, its roots and its effects, will lead to full comprehension of the problem. There are theoretical systems of justice submitted by the philosophers Rawls and Nozick, the concept of Social Doctrine of the Catholic church, and the empirically based proposition of Wilkinson, all of which to be introduced, discussed, and assessed. The same applies to role models in practice, fair communities, which exist both under the principles of commons and of the Kibbuz movement. Would they prove apt as template for a better property concept? The answer to this question will be given by first systematically producing pros and cons, lights and shadows of the existing order and subsequently opposing them, weighed and assessed according to the autors convictions. It will appear that none of the alternatives ?centrally planned economy and economy of commons- are desirable and hence the traditionally overcome system is to be maintained. It needs, however, amendments to match the requirements of social liability and limitation of income, agreed to in common.