Re: Marx, Engel and Morris on George
--- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, John David Kromkowski wrote:
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 2:48 PM, roy_langston wrote:
Me: Unlikely. While George was certainly the originator of the movement and
his death was a huge blow to it, by the time he died others were capable of
carrying it on. The movement had already stalled because without a UIE
small landholders ("Pay rent on MY land? WTF?") and even the landless ("Pay
the same rent as now? WTF?") found it too difficult to understand where their benefits lay.
John: That is just a re-writing of history.
No, it is not. The opposition to LVT of small landowners like family farms is obvious in contemporaneous sources like small town newspapers.
John: There was not popular opposition
Now THAT is just a rewriting of history. There was huge and often intransigent opposition from small landowners like family farmers who correctly feared their principal assets were to be eliminated and they would have to pay rent on "their own land."
John: The history of Hyattsville for example and Cleveland's Mayor Johnson shows
that the opposition involved legal problems (at the federal level how to an
apportioned tax and and the state level uniformity clauses other other prop
13 like provisions limiting property tax and at the local level Dillon's rule, uniformity, etc.
The legal problems were just convenient roadblocks thrown up by the opposition. Given sufficient popular support driven by a UIE, they could have been circumvented or eliminated.
John: Through it all was powerful landed opposition who
at the time basically owned state legislatures and in turn the Senate (not yet popularly elected.)
But the franchise had been extended to non-landowners decades before, so the real barrier was lack of popular support. As almost all voters were either small landowners or tenants, the lack of a UIE was likely the deciding factor stopping them from supporting the Single Tax.
John: The was also the problem from the left who wanted
And to tax income per the Communist Manifesto. True. But again, the egalitarian effect of the UIE would have greatly reduced the comparative appeal of the socialist left by shifting the LVT tax burden dramatically upward.
-- Roy Langston
- It all depends on what you are writing and who will be the reader.Unfortunately, modern schooling isn't great at producing readers so material must be made simple for them. Which point doesn't throw out other writing which may be more complicated as it conveys more subtle directions..Harry********************The Alumni GroupThe Henry George Schoolof Los AngelesTujunga CA 90243(818) 352-4141********************On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 6:55 AM, John <burns-john@...> wrote:
--- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, Harry Pollard <harrypollard0@...> wrote:
> However, I suppose the short sentence is now
> the thing, which may or may not be an improvement.
Harry, tabloid newspapers use short sentences. People are familiar with that. So, you have to write to what they can easily understand. If they have to do double-takes they lose interest. It is that simple. Churchill realised that a long time ago. His books on WW2 and super easy to understand. The proof readers would highlight parts of the book(s) and he would override them. In the end they thanked him for teaching them how to write simple English.