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

RE: [LandCafe] Re: FT

Expand Messages
  • David Reed
    Not that I know how the HK lease system works, but I should imagine the leases are pretty long and assigned to a purchaser on transfer (without upward
    Message 1 of 111 , Nov 5, 2012
      Not that I know how the HK lease system works, but I should imagine the leases are pretty long and assigned to a purchaser on transfer (without upward revaluation) ,so there would be plenty of opportunity for inflation to creep in,would there not? Leasing would seem a pretty clumsy , unresponsive way to deal with  changing situations,perhaps.Rather dented my enthusiam for land nationalisation,to be honest; unless you had to surrender an incompleted lease on transfer so the purchaser had to pick up a completely new land lease.Might help.
      Some blogs talk about the effects of American QE3 on HK property.Did n't QE3 kick in a matter of mere months ago?
      If so and the money is showing up the other side of the Pacific, then one answer might be to re-think QE as a concept.
      The idea of distributing QE to the people including issuing  "time limited spending vouchers" to all households as proposed by Robt Skidelsky in this latter instance, and Anatole Kalestsky and Steve Keen in general, is,again, worth looking at .

      To: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com
      From: kjetil.r.johansen@...
      Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 14:06:37 +0000
      Subject: [LandCafe] Re: FT


      --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, Dave Wetzel <davewetzel42@...> wrote:
      > From The Financial Times Monday 5th November:
      > "Fears of HK commercial property bubble"
      > <http://link.ft.com/r/EB8122/WHLXQS/3OI2JE/L9ARLC/IESY0F/6C/h?a1=2012&a2=11&a3=5>
      > Why should this be when Hong Kong collects land value through leasing?
      > Dave Wetzel

      They simply do not collect enough. Hong-Kong collects, according to the Heritage Foundation, 13% of GDP in taxes, a third of most Western countries today. Land rents, even post-lease & rates are huge. They are also very stingy on releasing land for use, in an attempt to maintain the high market values of land.

      This paper describes some of the issues with the land-lease system.

      "In Hong Kong, over the 1970 to 1995 period, 75% of the total land lease revenue came from initial auctions and grants, and 20% came from lease modifications. This reliance on initial
      public auctions is somewhat risky and the government will have to carefully schedule its land leasing. Had the government leased all land sites rapidly, at the time when their values were low, it would have lost its ability to capture future increments because demanding additional payments from lessees for lease modifications and renewal had proven either politically controversial or technically difficult ... However, high initial land premiums has not been helpful in lowering the high housing costs in the private market."


    • Harry Pollard
      JDK, Those who survive are presumably the fittest to survive for the fittest just describes those who have survived. With regard to your last sentence –
      Message 111 of 111 , Nov 23, 2012

        Those who survive are presumably the fittest to survive for the "fittest" just describes those who have survived.

        With regard to your last sentence – Stalin got there first.


        The Alumni Group 
        The Henry George School
        of Los Angeles
        Tujunga   CA   90243
               (818) 352-4141

        On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 9:54 AM, JDKromkowski <jdkromkowski@...> wrote:

        Evolution is not really: the survival of the "fittest" It is just survival of that which survives. Evolution is a way of describing the process of how variation within a population will lead to variation eventually of species.  There are plenty of genes along for the ride which are not particularly "the fittest".  

        Yes the survival of the two apostolic lungs of Christianity (Catholics and the Eastern church) despite its massive weakness and in fact embracement of weakness of the god who becomes human and is rejected and put to death is a puzzle and crazy on its face. It drove Nietzsche crazy (well that and syphillus drove him crazy).  It also drove the communists crazy too.   Massive defense? How many tanks does the church have?


        Sent from my iPad

        On Nov 16, 2012, at 11:26 PM, "mattbieker" <agrarian.justice@...> wrote:


        --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, John David Kromkowski <jdkromkowski@...> wrote:
        > On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:01 PM, mattbieker <agrarian.justice@...
        > > wrote:
        > >
        > > The catholic church has one real function: serving the clergy. When it
        > > was able to, it dominated a large swath of the earth in an imperial form.
        > > It can't now, so it fills out whatever niches it can; but the main thing is
        > > ensuring that members of clergy don't have to go and get real jobs.
        > >
        > Thanks for sharing this one too. I'm getting better picture of Land Cafe.
        > It really is best if we get it all out in the open. It's for the same
        > reason I won't hide my background.
        > This isn't a cocktail party, where we need to avoid the topic for
        > charitable purposes - or at least for the purposes of not interfering with
        > mutual love of beer or gin or your choice. I'd still have a beer in
        > Baltimore (once), with any of you clowns.
        > JDK

        *shrugs* Whatever one thinks of Roy's evolutionary basis for morals, I think there's fairly clearly a pseudo-evolutionary basis for ideas and institutions. Dawkins made this case in his "The Selfish Gene." Basically, ideas are duplicated, with variation, in the minds of individuals; from there, it's survival of the fittest. The conceptual equivalent to a gene being a "meme." Why do religious institutions survive despite being a load of crap that generally act as a drain on society? They're very advanced critters in the world of memes; they've evolved a whole host of defenses to offset their massive weaknesses, such as the notion that it's not polite or even acceptable to question a man's faith, or that without beliefs in these memes, we have no basis for social behavior.

        Catholicism isn't necessarily the most egregious case of this sort of memetic virus (that has to go to Scientology, don't you think?), but that's what it is, and all the bottom line of them all is the same: enrichment (both financial as well as emotional) of clergy. Still and all, its senseless and generally ad-hoc opposition to contraception, even in the light of AIDS epidemics, is horrible enough in and of itself to give me a fairly thoroughgoing distaste for it in particular, and I'd pretty much rather not see any meme I deem useful or good to be mixed up with it.

        Personally, I think one of the best parts of online discussion is that there's less tendency to hold back one's beliefs; many lament this, saying that the internet just makes everyone rude because they don't fear social repercussions, but I believe there's inherent value there, as it allows for a more rapid evolution of memes. The noise and nastiness comes with the territory, and I think people will just eventually find a new normal.

        One common Christian meme is certainly right though: hate the sin, and not the sinner. I agree, I'd have a beer with any of you. It's worth making a conscious effort not to take attacks against our beliefs too personally, because it turns out everyone tends to be wrong quite often.

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