Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

A love story to Capitalism and Distributism

Expand Messages
  • David Reed
    As a self dubbed socialist of the type Walto refers to,I certainly see the Georgist tax as redistributive and once ventured to say so on this site thinking
    Message 1 of 4 , May 2, 2011
      As a self dubbed socialist of the type Walto refers to,I certainly see the Georgist tax as redistributive and once ventured to say so on this site thinking that this view was uncontentious .But apparently not.I was soundly rebuked on the grounds , as I remember, that the present distribution of landed wealth was hopelessly compromised and that any " redistribution" would only make matters worse.
       
      Contrary to Walto's implicit assumption, I tend to feel that George's tax was more radical than Marxism because i) it could be, and was, introduced by majority legislation in the UK and ii) would put a whole unproductive class out of business virtually at a stroke. I have only favoured the milder JS Mill version because the landed class has recruited electoral majorities through Ownership Society outflanking movements which have protected landed elites with electoral cannon fodder prepared to vote against their best interests as workers in order to preserve property values.
       
      The Mill "fix" of not allowing land values to inflate combined with the more modern " Keynesian" element of the public ownership of credit creation ,(perhaps nothing so extreme), could hold down landed wealth while productive wealth rose quite quickly around it,producing the supremacy of productive over passive investment which George envisaged--- but not so fast or as likely to provoke reaction.
       
      Anyway enough of all this: enjoy the latest LVT proclamation in the UK's Guardian this time by Philip Inman entitled "Tax property not people" (May 2) Maybe Brit lefties (or left of centre) are doing better getting LVT into the mainstream national media than Americans frightened silly of union action and supporting Michael Moore as in some remake of "Momma told me not to come " by Three Dog Night.
    • walto
      ... As I ve mentioned several times, I have no problem with the Mill tax--if it s all that s politically feasible. Politics is the art of the possible, and as
      Message 2 of 4 , May 2, 2011
        --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, David Reed <dbcreed@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > As a self dubbed socialist of the type Walto refers to,I certainly see the Georgist tax as redistributive and once ventured to say so on this site thinking that this view was uncontentious .But apparently not.I was soundly rebuked on the grounds , as I remember, that the present distribution of landed wealth was hopelessly compromised and that any " redistribution" would only make matters worse.
        >
        > Contrary to Walto's implicit assumption, I tend to feel that George's tax was more radical than Marxism because i) it could be, and was, introduced by majority legislation in the UK and ii) would put a whole unproductive class out of business virtually at a stroke. I have only favoured the milder JS Mill version because the landed class has recruited electoral majorities through Ownership Society outflanking movements which have protected landed elites with electoral cannon fodder prepared to vote against their best interests as workers in order to preserve property values.
        >
        > The Mill "fix" of not allowing land values to inflate combined with the more modern " Keynesian" element of the public ownership of credit creation ,(perhaps nothing so extreme), could hold down landed wealth while productive wealth rose quite quickly around it,producing the supremacy of productive over passive investment which George envisaged--- but not so fast or as likely to provoke reaction.
        >

        As I've mentioned several times, I have no problem with the Mill tax--if it's all that's politically feasible. Politics is the art of the possible, and as George conceded, a tax on unearned land gains is certainly better than nothing.

        I don't see it being any sort of solution to the long-term woes connected with concentration of wealth such as outsourcing, loss of democracy because of special interests, etc. though. It could make somethings a little better, and I would never scoff at that.



        > Anyway enough of all this: enjoy the latest LVT proclamation in the UK's Guardian this time by Philip Inman entitled "Tax property not people" (May 2) Maybe Brit lefties (or left of centre) are doing better getting LVT into the mainstream national media than Americans frightened silly of union action and supporting Michael Moore as in some remake of "Momma told me not to come " by Three Dog Night.
        >

        Brit lefties are to me much preferable to their American counterparts (as well as their American non-counterparts) in many ways--not just in getting messages to the media, but in having more sensible things to say in the first place. That ain't saying a hell of a lot though. The U.S. is a weed garden of stupid views about nearly everything at present.

        W
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.