This didn't make it into the article because it was very last minute, but Mamdani opened his speech last night with a nod to 19th century socialist Eugene Debs. Debs himself was very influenced by Henry George and his thinking about land!
> Then we have another bill, which would permanently sunset an existing bill called 119-R that deals with value capture. If passed, our bill would authorize the city to engage with the MTA and participate in a value-capture mechanism. Right now, when the MTA builds out infrastructure, it creates value in the surrounding area, but while the MTA takes the cost of that construction, it never receives the value that it creates. This bill authorizes the city to come to an agreement with the MTA to create a value-capture program, whereby some of this additional value created would be taxed and redirected back to the MTA as a new source of revenue. That’s critical for producing revenue and addressing the imbalance in how it has so often been, where the state creates value and then private entities get to capture that value and retain it.
I bought a copy of the George book (after reading a NYT feature about Georgism — did you see that?) and it’s on my reading list. Seems like an idea whose time has come.
I'm a bit biased here, but I find my colleagues blog posts on gameofrent.com, particularly Part 0, to be a very good overview of Georgism and Land Value Taxes. I recommend it if you haven't seen
Relevant rent control excerpt from Progress and Poverty:
> If landlords were prohibited from asking an increase of rent from their tenants and from ejecting a tenant so long as the fixed rent was paid, the body of the producers would gain nothing. Economic rent would still increase, and would still steadily lessen the proportion of the produce going to labor and capital. The only difference would be that the tenants of the first landlords, who would become landlords in their turn, would profit by the increase.
It’s never a bad time to promote LVT, but this political juncture is a very good time. With LVT you can “tax the rich” without punishing work, savings and investment.
I would just like to point out how absolutely *fantastic* Mamdani's branding is (ETA: not even because it's particularly good branding; rather it is that unlike other political brands, it isn't absolutely horrible)
Taxes deliver nothing to the community. They deliver people's money to politicians and bureaucrats who as often misspend it as not (why Dems repeatedly fall out of favor). "Returning land value to the community" requires a dividend, as in Singapore, and as HG endorsed at least six times. A dividend is a way to win a tax or fee or dues on land, as it won the carbon tax in British Columbia. All this aside, it's silly to chat here instead of with the new mayor.
This didn't make it into the article because it was very last minute, but Mamdani opened his speech last night with a nod to 19th century socialist Eugene Debs. Debs himself was very influenced by Henry George and his thinking about land!
https://www.marxists.org/archive/debs/works/1889/891100-debs-land.pdf
H/t to Reed Schwartz for the point that Mamdani was the prime sponsor on this MTA value capture bill in the NYS assembly. 👀👀👀
https://trackbill.com/bill/new-york-assembly-bill-1032-updates-value-capture-mechanisms-for-nyc-and-the-mta/2588452/
He talks about it in this Jacobin interview:
https://jacobin.com/2022/12/zohran-mamdani-fix-the-mta-new-york-transit-legislation
> Then we have another bill, which would permanently sunset an existing bill called 119-R that deals with value capture. If passed, our bill would authorize the city to engage with the MTA and participate in a value-capture mechanism. Right now, when the MTA builds out infrastructure, it creates value in the surrounding area, but while the MTA takes the cost of that construction, it never receives the value that it creates. This bill authorizes the city to come to an agreement with the MTA to create a value-capture program, whereby some of this additional value created would be taxed and redirected back to the MTA as a new source of revenue. That’s critical for producing revenue and addressing the imbalance in how it has so often been, where the state creates value and then private entities get to capture that value and retain it.
I bought a copy of the George book (after reading a NYT feature about Georgism — did you see that?) and it’s on my reading list. Seems like an idea whose time has come.
Yes the NYT feature was great!
I'm a bit biased here, but I find my colleagues blog posts on gameofrent.com, particularly Part 0, to be a very good overview of Georgism and Land Value Taxes. I recommend it if you haven't seen
Oh, when you said “seen” I was afraid it was a video. It’s text! Glorious text, which I can read and absorb at my favored speed.
Thank you!
Relevant rent control excerpt from Progress and Poverty:
> If landlords were prohibited from asking an increase of rent from their tenants and from ejecting a tenant so long as the fixed rent was paid, the body of the producers would gain nothing. Economic rent would still increase, and would still steadily lessen the proportion of the produce going to labor and capital. The only difference would be that the tenants of the first landlords, who would become landlords in their turn, would profit by the increase.
https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/henry-george/progress-and-poverty/text/single-page#chapter-6-1-6
It’s never a bad time to promote LVT, but this political juncture is a very good time. With LVT you can “tax the rich” without punishing work, savings and investment.
Relieved to see Lina Khan on his team. I think her presence signifies less Marxism, more markets.
Example: https://x.com/RBReich/status/1985859611082035257
Holy heckin' BASED Batman
I would just like to point out how absolutely *fantastic* Mamdani's branding is (ETA: not even because it's particularly good branding; rather it is that unlike other political brands, it isn't absolutely horrible)
Taxes deliver nothing to the community. They deliver people's money to politicians and bureaucrats who as often misspend it as not (why Dems repeatedly fall out of favor). "Returning land value to the community" requires a dividend, as in Singapore, and as HG endorsed at least six times. A dividend is a way to win a tax or fee or dues on land, as it won the carbon tax in British Columbia. All this aside, it's silly to chat here instead of with the new mayor.