7 Comments

I have found over the past 50 years of membership to the Georgists IU that little progress has been made in the Single Tax proposal. I there choose to introduce an alternative way of doing the same thing WHICH WILL NOT CAUSE OPPOSITION FROM LAND OWNERS.

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 economic’s-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 economic’s-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 economic’s 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 Gov’ment’s till.

With the land properly shared, the government sees

That site development stays with the current leasees.

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.

Expand full comment
Dec 13, 2022Liked by Ryan Geddie

How do you feel about adding an exemption for primary residences? This is typically the little detail that gets my disinterested relatives onboard, because it shifts them away from thinking about themselves (taxes are scary!) to thinking about commercial real estate. But I don't have a good sense on the impact such an exemption would have. For example, is that a 10% ding to tax revenue? 90%? Does it create perverse incentives I haven't thought of?

Expand full comment
Jan 22, 2023·edited Jan 22, 2023

I think the concept has merit and is worth exploring, but there is another component you did not mention that significantly impacts property taxes, and that is the per pupil spending by the state on public education.

Even though public education is a State responsibility, State funding of public education in Texas is well below 50% of the total public education cost, while local property taxes continue to take on a higher and higher percentage of the funding burden each year. Texas ranks 36th in per pupil education funding, yet we are 2nd in GDP. Education cuts made by the Legislature in 2009 have not been rescinded. Instead, more and more state spending is going to other political priorities, while the two main things a State should spend money on (roads and education) are being left behind.

School property taxes make up 65-75% of all property taxes in many parts of Texas. So even if you fix property taxes with a land value tax, the tax rate will be obscene unless the state elected officials start prioritizing funding of public education.

Expand full comment

So Ryan, presumably as an active Georgist you might do more than just like this idea, but spread it about a bit! It was written as a kind of reply to a question from David Tiggs (contributing editor of the British Journal "Land and Liberty") at a past Georgist conference about how can we make the Georgist claims acceptable to landowners?

Expand full comment