Archemides sought to move the earth by use of a lever and a fulcrum. We have Progress and Poverty as a lever, but where can its force be pivoted when there is firm objection from land owners to the introduction of the Single Tax as the means for providing equality of opportunity?
The way I choose to support the great ideas contained within this book is through their better clarification. I am not alone in this and in particular I recommend the book "LAND" by Martin Adams. My book also clarifies the more general situation about the better understanding of our social system of macroeconomicsand specifically about how it works. Past confusion on this subject is still being created through how the subject is usually taught, but my book "Consequential Macroeconomics" and its associated working papers SSRN 2855571 "Einstein's Criterion Applied to Logical Macroeconomics Modelling" and SSRN 2600103 "A Mechanical Model for Teaching Macroeconomics" are significant ways for finding out how our social sytem really works and of what it consists in terms of how it functions. Write to me for free e-copies and share them with your friends. chesterdh@hotmail.com
I don't think painting landowners as the bad guy is a persuasive or effective strategy. Make allies not enemies. Channel the ghost of Monty Hall and Let's Make a Deal!
Hey Mr. Landowner, if you agree to the Land Value Tax, you get what's behind Door #1: NO income tax, NO sales tax, NO capital gains tax, NO tax on anything you build on your land.
As a landowner I would much rather pay some of these smaller tax amounts, because I know that with the passing of time my site will have increased in value so much that the total of these other sums will be much less. I can even borrow significant amounts of money using my site as a co-lateral holding.
However, should a far looking government be willing to buy my site at its present value, I could then invest the money and enjoy the interest in a much more stable fashion than if I were to depend on my unreliable tenant to pay his/her rent on time and over the same period. It would be more pratical (if not less unfriendly) were the Georgist Movement support this alternate policy which effectively produces the same national income without any tax being involved.
Bennie, I certainly cannot agree with your above thougt because I see so much harm and trouble that the ability to hold onto and control land values is driving a much larger slice of the population into poverty, dispair, homelessness and chaos. This website is titled "Progress and Poverty" for good reason, but you seem to have forgotten what Henry G's book is all about. I have shown elsewhere how we can and should modifiy our approach to landlordism so that he/she will not be antagonized with the Single Tax proposal and I do it without channelling up any ghosts. Below my poem shows how.
A More Stealthy Georgist Cat
The Georgist cat is small and lean
And often doesn’t get to be seen.
It hides in the branches of an economics'-tree
So it takes a long while for you or for me,
To appreciate its cute and original form
That the landlords are so ready to scorn.
The economics'-tree has many fine branches
(On which we contend, there are no free-lunches).
Whilst the land-owning rich in the city all claim
As bloated capitalists, that they’re not to blame
For the gap that lays ‘twixt the poor and the wealthy,
But oppose any tax to make our nation healthy.
Have you heard the tale of a committee, that
Thought to bell and get warning of a fat cat?
But could not find a soul to apply this device,
Because typically all were a council of mice!
Our Georgist cat has a bell ready-fitted,
(Which makes this analogy more to be pitted).
This warning sound makes our ideals unwanted,
For a new tax is how politicians get doubted.
So the Georgist cat fails to catch any mice
That pose as landlords, along with their vice.
But how shall we silence the bell’s warning sound
And quieten the news that our pussy’s around?
Our Georgist feline is in serious error,
‘Cause its bell draws attention not only to whether
Valuable sites can be ethically shared,
But also the rent from a site is declared
As the means to replace other kinds of taxation,
Which obviously causes the landlords vexation.
In the economics' tree many other beasts lurk
But are missed, after learning of Henry G’s quirk
Through the cat-finder’s recently brilliant discovery.
This writer seeks a new means for recovery
From our politi-unacceptable claim,
And stealthily project LVT once again.
If we would but examine some more of the tree
Alternatives are waiting there for us to see.
Among them is hiding a far better way
For an equivalent LVT effect, to stay
In essence, without causing such evil offences
To the landlords and their partitioning fences.
When a property-owner decides to sell--quick
The gov’ment buys its land, and not the public!
Its occupant then leases it for a similar fee
To the One-Tax of Henry George’s decree.
Any buildings on-site should be sold as previously
But without the land, on which the price grievously
Had risen, with huge speculation in its advance
That stopped entrepreneurs from having a chance.
The cost of this land must be raised through new bonds
Which the government sells and the public responds,
‘Though their interest-rate’s a bit lower than rent,
Their returns are more stable than the average tenant!
This process will take many years to complete--
So its financial support is no great money feat.
After the lease-fees begin to collect,
Gov’ments can tax less, and firmly expect
To pursue this policy without change, until
All the lease-fees are site-rents in the national till.
With the land properly shared, the government sees
That site development stays with the current leases.
Other taxes that cause so much trouble and hate
Are scrapped, with great pleasure to all in the state,
Except for some bankers and the tax collectors
Whose actions no longer apply in these sectors.
Land-rights will be shared through this simple device,
By a fast-growing country that takes our advice. 😎
Archemides sought to move the earth by use of a lever and a fulcrum. We have Progress and Poverty as a lever, but where can its force be pivoted when there is firm objection from land owners to the introduction of the Single Tax as the means for providing equality of opportunity?
The way I choose to support the great ideas contained within this book is through their better clarification. I am not alone in this and in particular I recommend the book "LAND" by Martin Adams. My book also clarifies the more general situation about the better understanding of our social system of macroeconomicsand specifically about how it works. Past confusion on this subject is still being created through how the subject is usually taught, but my book "Consequential Macroeconomics" and its associated working papers SSRN 2855571 "Einstein's Criterion Applied to Logical Macroeconomics Modelling" and SSRN 2600103 "A Mechanical Model for Teaching Macroeconomics" are significant ways for finding out how our social sytem really works and of what it consists in terms of how it functions. Write to me for free e-copies and share them with your friends. chesterdh@hotmail.com
I don't think painting landowners as the bad guy is a persuasive or effective strategy. Make allies not enemies. Channel the ghost of Monty Hall and Let's Make a Deal!
Hey Mr. Landowner, if you agree to the Land Value Tax, you get what's behind Door #1: NO income tax, NO sales tax, NO capital gains tax, NO tax on anything you build on your land.
As a landowner I would much rather pay some of these smaller tax amounts, because I know that with the passing of time my site will have increased in value so much that the total of these other sums will be much less. I can even borrow significant amounts of money using my site as a co-lateral holding.
However, should a far looking government be willing to buy my site at its present value, I could then invest the money and enjoy the interest in a much more stable fashion than if I were to depend on my unreliable tenant to pay his/her rent on time and over the same period. It would be more pratical (if not less unfriendly) were the Georgist Movement support this alternate policy which effectively produces the same national income without any tax being involved.
Bennie, I certainly cannot agree with your above thougt because I see so much harm and trouble that the ability to hold onto and control land values is driving a much larger slice of the population into poverty, dispair, homelessness and chaos. This website is titled "Progress and Poverty" for good reason, but you seem to have forgotten what Henry G's book is all about. I have shown elsewhere how we can and should modifiy our approach to landlordism so that he/she will not be antagonized with the Single Tax proposal and I do it without channelling up any ghosts. Below my poem shows how.