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

Re: Fred Harrison does not say "Land Value Tax"

Expand Messages
  • John
    https://soundcloud.com/martin-adams/fred-harrison-at-occupy-london/s-XDlVM Fred Harrison stated that: the concept of Land Value Tax is philosophically
    Message 1 of 19 , Feb 5, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      https://soundcloud.com/martin-adams/fred-harrison-at-occupy-london/s-XDlVM

      Fred Harrison stated that:
      "the concept of Land Value Tax is philosophically incoherent, politically stupid"

      "If you are conceding that you are going to tax land values, you are saying to people at large, the land value belongs to you and we will tax you. People do not like tax."
    • walto
      ... It s obvious that it s long been very important to Fred Harrison to say stuff that is over-the-top for attention. Apparently, he thinks that saying that
      Message 2 of 19 , Feb 6, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "John" wrote:
        >
        >
        > https://soundcloud.com/martin-adams/fred-harrison-at-occupy-london/s-XDlVM
        >
        > Fred Harrison stated that:
        > "the concept of Land Value Tax is philosophically incoherent, politically stupid"
        >
        > "If you are conceding that you are going to tax land values, you are saying to people at large, the land value belongs to you and we will tax you. People do not like tax."
        >


        It's obvious that it's long been very important to Fred Harrison to say stuff that is over-the-top for attention. Apparently, he thinks that saying that everything he's ever written is "philosophically incoherent and politically stupid" is a winning strategy both for him personally and for geoism generally.

        I doubt it myself, BWTHDIK?

        W
      • John
        ... Walto, this might be useful. why people fail to understand land valuetaxation:
        Message 3 of 19 , Feb 6, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "walto" wrote:
          >
          >
          >
          > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "John" wrote:
          > >
          > >
          > > https://soundcloud.com/martin-adams/fred-harrison-at-occupy-london/s-XDlVM
          > >
          > > Fred Harrison stated that:
          > > "the concept of Land Value Tax is philosophically incoherent, politically stupid"
          > >
          > > "If you are conceding that you are going to tax land values, you are saying to people at large, the land value belongs to you and we will tax you. People do not like tax."
          >
          > It's obvious that it's long been very important to Fred Harrison to say stuff that is over-the-top for attention. Apparently, he thinks that saying that everything he's ever written is "philosophically incoherent and politically stupid" is a winning strategy both for him personally and for geoism generally.
          >
          > I doubt it myself, BWTHDIK?

          Walto, this might be useful.
          why people fail to understand land valuetaxation:
          http://southcentrallibdems.org.uk/en/article/2012/611161/why-people-fail-to-understand-land-value-taxation
        • harrypollard
          Andrew. We don’t produce, play, or live, on land. We produce, play, or live, on locations. I’ve been arguing this for many years. I think you on to
          Message 4 of 19 , Feb 7, 2013
          • 0 Attachment

            Andrew.

             

            We don’t produce, play, or live, on land. We produce, play, or live, on locations.

             

            I’ve been arguing this for many years. I think you on to something.

             

            While the monopoly aspects of land are cloudier – there is a lot of land - much of the US is pretty empty – the monopoly aspects of locations are easy to see. That this monopoly aspect leads to exorbitant prices is also pretty evident.

             

            Also, it’s easy to see that people cause Rents.

             

            When I chaired London’s Young Liberals, we would soapbox all over London – including all day Sunday at Marble Arch Speaker’s Corner. The Terrible Three – Roy Douglas, David Mills, and myself kept the crowds thinking (and entertained).

             

            Selling the idea of LVT was easy.

             

            Land-values are fairly small under the house where you live, but go into the High Street and land-values zoom. Why? It’s because people congregate in the High Street. The value of land is caused by you. Why should a landholder get the values you create? We should tax it and get rid of purchase taxes (this was a while ago).

             

            Anyway, this is the way we did it back then and the crowds (many hundreds) seemed to have no trouble getting it.

             

            Then we would get on to Free Trade and that would stir up the protectionists!

             

            Harry

             

            ***********************

            The Alumni Group

            Henry George School

            Of Los Angeles

            Tujunga  CA  91042

            (818) 352-4141

            ***********************

             

            From: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:LandCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ADuffield1@...
            Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2013 1:06 AM
            To: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: Re: [LandCafe] Fred Harrison does not say "Land Value Tax"

             

             

            Compiling an LVT briefing paper for Scottish Liberal Democrats last
            year, I coined the term 'Lo-Tax' (Location Taxation) which ALTER has
            now adopted as a euphemism for the reform we seek. For once, such a
            term allows us - rather than our opponents - to hijack the language of
            economics, helping talk of a Lo-Tax economy to take a slightly
            different slant.

            Fred Harrison's triple dilemma - which I think we share - seems to be
            that:

            a) it is fatal to talk about LVT as a tax (which of course it isn't),
            yet if we try to call it anything else it is portrayed as a tax in
            sheep's clothing by our opponents;

            b) the 65% of (western) people who now have a stake in land (i.e. the
            postage stamp-sized plot on which their home sits) are unwilling to
            engage with any new tax - especially one on the property 'investment'
            they hold in lieu of a pension;

            c) LVT, however it is dressed up and patiently explained as a
            REPLACEMENT for deadweight taxation, is nonetheless viewed and
            castigated as an ADDITIONAL fiscal burden by opponents and those who
            have already closed their minds.

            I contend that most people who bother to vote in so-called democratic
            elections will at least have passing familiarity with the concept of a
            low-tax economy - typically lower personal tax with correspondingly
            smaller state expenditure - although it is rarely ever given much
            definition by politicians (they don't need to!). Despite this, I also
            contend that on balance, for the 65% mentioned above, lower taxation
            per se is a more attractive proposition that its fiscal opposite.

            Lo-Tax is thus a semantic way of hitching LVT to a more populist policy
            ideal. It calls a spade a spade (even though we know its a shovel); it
            sounds to the home-owning 65% that it might be something they should
            support; and it suggests a lower overall level of tax than the status
            quo (which would be true under an LVT regime for the same revenue
            raised).

            The neo-classicists have twisted enough economic language. Playing them
            at their own game may be the best way forward!

            Lo-Tax: lowering taxes by taxing locations.

            Andrew Duffield

            -----Original Message-----
            From: John burns-john@...>
            To: LandCafe LandCafe@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Sat, 2 Feb 2013 17:55
            Subject: [LandCafe] Fred Harrison does not say "Land Value Tax"

            Fred Harrison speaking. He said he wasted 40 years of his life
            promoting LVT. He said Land Value Tax is a forbidden word to him. He
            approaches the matter from a different angle.

            https://soundcloud.com/martin-adams/fred-harrison-at-occupy-london/s-XDlVM

          • roy_langston
            ... Locations _are_ land. ... How astonishing... -- Roy Langston
            Message 5 of 19 , Feb 7, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "harrypollard" wrote:

              > We don’t produce, play, or live, on land. We produce, play, or live, on locations.

              Locations _are_ land.

              > I’ve been arguing this for many years.

              How astonishing...

              -- Roy Langston
            • John
              ... We have title on locations.
              Message 6 of 19 , Feb 8, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston" wrote:
                >
                > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "harrypollard" wrote:
                >
                > > We don’t produce, play, or live, on land. We produce, play, or live, on locations.
                >
                > Locations _are_ land.
                >
                > > I’ve been arguing this for many years.
                >
                > How astonishing...

                We have "title" on locations.
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.