What I have done in this book, if I have correctly solved the great problem I have sought to investigate, is, to unite the truth perceived by the school of Smith and Ricardo to the truth perceived by the school of Proudhon and Lasalle; to show that laissez faire (in its full true meaning) opens the way to a realization of the noble dreams of socialism.
I liked this article! I think the idea that liberty and equality are fundamentally at odds is very limiting. Thanks for putting this out.
Great piece, thanks Martin! Even as a self-identified left-libertarian this helped me understand a lot more about what that means.
One different perspective I have is that I don't really see the unpopularity of LVT as a consequence of a minority of politically-connected wealthy elites. Rather, I think it's just that two-thirds of households own their homes, and thus most of their net worth (and therefore their class) is vested in propping-up the value of that asset, so for the majority of voters an increase in land taxes is basically off-the-table.
Thanks for the article. You said - "While abolition of the land monopoly might be necessary to abolish economic privilege, it is not sufficient."
Could you explain? What other economic privilege would be left? I'm assuming, of course, that by "the abolition of the land monopoly" you mean the single tax.
So, I get the impression that Geoist is a different spelling of Georgist? Not sure though? Although, maybe it is a name for a more general philosophical movement which is aligned? not sure?
Maybe we'll get to test the idea : "Detroit wants to be the first big American city to tax land value" from The Economist https://www.economist.com/united-states/2023/10/05/detroit-wants-to-be-the-first-big-american-city-to-tax-land-value
I read some articles about geolibertarianism in college in the '90s and always found it appealing.
I'm skeptical that one can "do away with the institution of the state". As Belle Waring once put it:
[E]veryone close your eyes and try to imagine a private, profit-making rights-enforcement organization which does not resemble the mafia, a street gang, those pesky fire-fighters / arsonists / looters who used to provide such "services" in old New York and Tokyo, medieval tax-farmers, or a Lendu militia. (In general, if thoughts of the Eastern Congo intrude, I suggest waving them away with the invisible hand and repeating "that's anarcho-capitalism" several times.) Nothing's happening but a buzzing noise, right?
Nonetheless, we could drastically curtail bureaucratic interference in everyday life (stuff like excessive professional licensing regimes, most of Euclidean zoning, etc). But you're going to need some kind of state monopoly on force for basic policing, tax collection, and distribution of the UBI.
This argument has been made before. It fails because the time problem. No marks.