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

Digest No 1674 "Neither left nor right"

Expand Messages
  • David Reed
    It is all very well Walto declaring himself to be above vulgar politics: vulgar politics thwarts LVT at every turn.The Labour Party intro d LVT in 1931; come
    Message 1 of 27 , May 26, 2010
      It is all very well Walto declaring himself to be above  vulgar politics: vulgar politics thwarts LVT at every turn.The Labour Party intro'd LVT in 1931; come the coalition and within the year LVT is abolished in the UK thanks to the villainous Tories.
       Had it remained on the statute book, we would not now be suffering from housing-land bubbles and banks having invested so much in bubble assets.The Euro is now imperilled in a repeat of the American problem :too much speculative building  of houses (in Spain/dream castles in Spain).
      Backbench Tories are threatening the contined existence of the coalition with the Liberals (even before the Queen's Speech) because they object to the joint idea of increasing Capital Gains Tax on second homes.What chance of getting LVT past these hyper-vigilant blackguards ?
      (Meanwhile stuck inside the Cabinet,quite powerless to affect events,are at least two committed Land Taxers from the Lib Dems).
      It is no use saying you are above the fray:they're still going to get you if you draw attention to LVT views. It is like shouting at encircling bullies "There's no stigma against illegitimacy,you bastards!" or worse like that bloke on Mythbusters who goes round saying " I reject your reality and substitute my own."


      Get a free e-mail account with Hotmail. Sign-up now.
    • John
      ... politics: vulgar politics thwarts LVT at every turn. LVT must not be tagged to an ism. It must not be, say, viewed as a taxation system of the left. Or
      Message 2 of 27 , May 27, 2010

        --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, David Reed <dbcreed@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > It is all very well Walto declaring himself to be 
        > above vulgar politics: vulgar politics thwarts LVT 
        > at every turn.

        LVT must not be tagged to an ism.  It must not be, say, viewed as a taxation system of the left.  Or the right for that matter. As is does not fit in, in any of these, as it is a part of economics being suitable to be slotted into any ism.

        The far right appears to like most wealth in the hands a very few. Why? I have never really understood why they think that way and think it a good think for a nation, but they do.  LVT distributes wealth more evenly than at present, so may be viewed as a tool of the left to them. Yet it encourages free enterprise and the free market which are very much a thing the right endorse.  It curtails speculators in one of the key aspects of classical economics, LAND, preventing destructive land bubbles so appealing to the left - although this would also appeal to the average man who now sees such destructive speculation as an evil.

        Full Geoism prevents speculation of LAND, by default by a land value tax, and naturally redistributes land - planning system permitting of course, which in the UK it will not do so much due to the Stalinist planning system.  However full Geoism needs further regulation over a land value tax in preventing speculation on the resources extracted from land - this may not appeal to to the far right. 

        LVT can be all things to all men of the political spectrum.  It has major elements appealing to all.  It is truly apolitical.

      • walto
        ... I don t know if it s apolitical but, despite many of its backers longings, it is not either essentially socialist or essentially libertarian. It is what
        Message 3 of 27 , May 27, 2010
          --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "John" <burns-john@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, David Reed <dbcreed@> wrote:
          > >
          > >
          > > It is all very well Walto declaring himself to be > above vulgar
          > politics: vulgar politics thwarts LVT > at every turn.
          > LVT must not be tagged to an ism. It must not be, say, viewed as a
          > taxation system of the left. Or the right for that matter. As is does
          > not fit in, in any of these, as it is a part of economics being suitable
          > to be slotted into any ism.
          > The far right appears to like most wealth in the hands a very few. Why?
          > I have never really understood why they think that way and think it a
          > good think for a nation, but they do. LVT distributes wealth more
          > evenly than at present, so may be viewed as a tool of the left to them.
          > Yet it encourages free enterprise and the free market which are very
          > much a thing the right endorse. It curtails speculators in one of the
          > key aspects of classical economics, LAND, preventing destructive land
          > bubbles so appealing to the left - although this would also appeal to
          > the average man who now sees such destructive speculation as an evil.
          > Full Geoism prevents speculation of LAND, by default by a land value
          > tax, and naturally redistributes land - planning system permitting of
          > course, which in the UK it will not do so much due to the Stalinist
          > planning system. However full Geoism needs further regulation over a
          > land value tax in preventing speculation on the resources extracted from
          > land - this may not appeal to to the far right.
          > LVT can be all things to all men of the political spectrum. It has
          > major elements appealing to all. It is truly apolitical.
          >


          I don't know if it's "apolitical" but, despite many of its backers longings, it is not either essentially socialist or essentially libertarian. It is what it is.

          W
        • walto
          ... Maybe it would be, but I have made no such declaration. ... I guess it s a good thing I haven t said that then. I ve been involved in any number of
          Message 4 of 27 , May 27, 2010
            --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, David Reed <dbcreed@...> wrote:
            >
            >
            > It is all very well Walto declaring himself to be above vulgar politics:


            Maybe it would be, but I have made no such declaration.


            >vulgar politics thwarts LVT at every turn.The Labour Party intro'd LVT in 1931; come the coalition and within the year LVT is abolished in the UK thanks to the villainous Tories.
            >
            > Had it remained on the statute book, we would not now be suffering from housing-land bubbles and banks having invested so much in bubble assets.The Euro is now imperilled in a repeat of the American problem :too much speculative building of houses (in Spain/dream castles in Spain).
            >
            > Backbench Tories are threatening the contined existence of the coalition with the Liberals (even before the Queen's Speech) because they object to the joint idea of increasing Capital Gains Tax on second homes.What chance of getting LVT past these hyper-vigilant blackguards ?
            >
            > (Meanwhile stuck inside the Cabinet,quite powerless to affect events,are at least two committed Land Taxers from the Lib Dems).
            >
            > It is no use saying you are above the fray

            I guess it's a good thing I haven't said that then. I've been involved in any number of frays--at the Federal, state and local levels. I just haven't tried to drag my geoist friends in based on the theory that if I like X and I also like Geoism, X must be a geoist principle.



            :they're still going to get you if you draw attention to LVT views. It is like shouting at encircling bullies "There's no stigma against illegitimacy,you bastards!" or worse like that bloke on Mythbusters who goes round saying " I reject your reality and substitute my own."
            >


            Here, I admit I have no idea what you're talking about.

            Best,

            W
          • roy_langston1
            ... I agree geoism is not essentially libertarian, but it is more compatible with libertarianism than with socialism: without private ownership of capital,
            Message 5 of 27 , May 27, 2010
              --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "walto" <calhorn@...>
              wrote:

              > I don't know if it's "apolitical" but, despite many
              > of its backers longings, it is not either essentially
              > socialist or essentially libertarian.

              I agree geoism is not essentially libertarian, but it
              is more compatible with libertarianism than with
              socialism: without private ownership of capital, there
              is no way to measure or to recover the full rent of
              land.

              -- Roy Langston
            • walto
              ... Maybe you re right. If so, let me suggest the following as a motto: Geoism. We may not be essentially libertarian, but we re more compatible with
              Message 6 of 27 , May 27, 2010
                --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston1" <roy_langston1@...> wrote:
                >
                > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "walto" <calhorn@>
                > wrote:
                >
                > > I don't know if it's "apolitical" but, despite many
                > > of its backers longings, it is not either essentially
                > > socialist or essentially libertarian.
                >
                > I agree geoism is not essentially libertarian, but it
                > is more compatible with libertarianism than with
                > socialism: without private ownership of capital, there
                > is no way to measure or to recover the full rent of
                > land.
                >
                > -- Roy Langston
                >


                Maybe you're right. If so, let me suggest the following as a motto:

                "Geoism. We may not be essentially libertarian, but we're more compatible with libertarians than we are with socialists!"

                That's probably farther than I'd prefer to go myself, but, being a team player type, if the group insists on it, I'll yield.

                W
              • roy_langston1
                ... Um, don t quit your day job, Walt... We geoists are big on competition, so maybe it would be interesting to have a little competition to create a good,
                Message 7 of 27 , May 28, 2010
                  --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "walto" <calhorn@...>
                  wrote:

                  > Maybe you're right. If so, let me suggest the
                  > following as a motto:
                  >
                  > "Geoism. We may not be essentially libertarian, but
                  > we're more compatible with libertarians than we are
                  > with socialists!"

                  Um, don't quit your day job, Walt...

                  We geoists are big on competition, so maybe it would
                  be interesting to have a little competition to
                  create a good, universally applicable motto or slogan
                  (what we in the PR biz call a "position line") for
                  land rent recovery. Or even better, get Schalkenbach
                  or one of the other foundations to put up some prize
                  money, and make it a BIG competition. The Kremer
                  Prize, a mere $50K, stimulated many millions of
                  dollars in research and development on human-powered
                  heavier-than-air flight, solving in 20 years a
                  problem that had stumped the best minds for centuries.

                  -- Roy Langston
                • walto
                  ... Hmmm. My proposal was intended as a reductio, not a serious proposal. So I guess you re saying I shouldn t quit my day job to be a comic.... But I have
                  Message 8 of 27 , May 28, 2010
                    --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston1" <roy_langston1@...> wrote:

                    >
                    > Um, don't quit your day job, Walt...
                    >

                    Hmmm. My proposal was intended as a reductio, not a serious proposal. So I guess you're saying I shouldn't quit my day job to be a comic....

                    But I have to admit I still think it's pretty funny. Let's rehearse it, shall we?

                    "Geoism. We may not be essentially libertarian, but
                    we're more compatible with libertarians than we are
                    with socialists!"

                    Nah, I was right: it's pretty funny.

                    W
                  • Scott Bergeson
                    Quoting walto on Fri, 28 May 2010 18:39:33 -0000: ___Roy Langston___ Um, don t quit your day job, Walt... ___W___ Hmmm. My proposal was intended as a reductio,
                    Message 9 of 27 , May 28, 2010
                      Quoting walto on Fri, 28 May 2010 18:39:33 -0000:

                      ___Roy Langston___
                      Um, don't quit your day job, Walt...

                      ___W___
                      Hmmm. My proposal was intended as a reductio, not a serious proposal.
                      So I guess you're saying I shouldn't quit my day job to be a comic....

                      But I have to admit I still think it's
                      pretty funny. Let's rehearse it, shall we?

                      "Geoism. We may not be essentially libertarian,
                      but we're more compatible with libertarians
                      than we are with socialists!"

                      Nah, I was right: it's pretty funny.
                      -----

                      Thinking Aloud
                      Structural Ambiguity in English (rebroadcast) - 5/27/2010

                      Have you heard the one about the man who rushes into a
                      doctor's office and shouts, "Doc! I think I'm shrinking!"
                      To which the doctor calmly responds, "Settle down. You'll
                      just have to be a little patient." What makes that joke
                      funny is grammatical ambiguity, a literary device that
                      can be either cute or annoying, depending on the context.
                      BYU professor of linguistics, Dallin D. Oaks joins us
                      to talk about it. -Original airdate: 2/11/2010 11:00 AM

                      Listen to audio
                      http://media.byub.org/mp3/fmarchive/thinkingaloud/2010/2/ta100211.mp3
                    • walto
                      BTW, speaking of mottos and big competitions, I m still waiting to see Jeff s new business cards with the (landslide!) winner on it. (A linked pdf would do
                      Message 10 of 27 , May 28, 2010
                        BTW, speaking of mottos and big competitions, I'm still waiting to see Jeff's new business cards with the (landslide!) winner on it. (A linked pdf would do the trick.)

                        (Or....could it be that there wasn't really any interest in anybody's 'votes' on anything, and nobody is actually doing anything whatever to any 'business cards'...that is, if there actually ARE any 'business cards' to do anything to.)

                        Ah, well. It's only participation in the 'process' that really matters, right? Viva la democracia!

                        W



                        --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston1" <roy_langston1@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "walto" <calhorn@>
                        > wrote:
                        >
                        > > Maybe you're right. If so, let me suggest the
                        > > following as a motto:
                        > >
                        > > "Geoism. We may not be essentially libertarian, but
                        > > we're more compatible with libertarians than we are
                        > > with socialists!"
                        >
                        > Um, don't quit your day job, Walt...
                        >
                        > We geoists are big on competition, so maybe it would
                        > be interesting to have a little competition to
                        > create a good, universally applicable motto or slogan
                        > (what we in the PR biz call a "position line") for
                        > land rent recovery. Or even better, get Schalkenbach
                        > or one of the other foundations to put up some prize
                        > money, and make it a BIG competition. The Kremer
                        > Prize, a mere $50K, stimulated many millions of
                        > dollars in research and development on human-powered
                        > heavier-than-air flight, solving in 20 years a
                        > problem that had stumped the best minds for centuries.
                        >
                        > -- Roy Langston
                        >
                      • Jeffery J. Smith
                        ... Plutocracia. I dumped it all into the lap of the person who volunteered to pay for it. Get this: they came up with something totally different! Go figure.
                        Message 11 of 27 , May 28, 2010
                          On May 28, 2010, at 11:50 AM, walto wrote:

                           

                          BTW, speaking of mottos and big competitions, I'm still waiting to see Jeff's new business cards with the (landslide!) winner on it. (A linked pdf would do the trick.)

                          (Or....could it be that there wasn't really any interest in anybody's 'votes' on anything, and nobody is actually doing anything whatever to any 'business cards'...that is, if there actually ARE any 'business cards' to do anything to.)

                          Ah, well. It's only participation in the 'process' that really matters, right? Viva la democracia! 

                          Plutocracia. I dumped it all into the lap of the person who volunteered to pay for it. Get this: they came up with something totally  different! Go figure.

                          SMITH, Jeffery J.
                          President, Forum on Geonomics
                          Land Rights course: www.course.earthrights.net
                          Share Earth's worth to prosper and conserve.

                        • walto
                          ... There s a shocker. W
                          Message 12 of 27 , May 28, 2010
                            --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffery J. Smith" <jjs@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > On May 28, 2010, at 11:50 AM, walto wrote:
                            >
                            > > BTW, speaking of mottos and big competitions, I'm still waiting to
                            > > see Jeff's new business cards with the (landslide!) winner on it.
                            > > (A linked pdf would do the trick.)
                            > >
                            > > (Or....could it be that there wasn't really any interest in
                            > > anybody's 'votes' on anything, and nobody is actually doing
                            > > anything whatever to any 'business cards'...that is, if there
                            > > actually ARE any 'business cards' to do anything to.)
                            > >
                            > > Ah, well. It's only participation in the 'process' that really
                            > > matters, right? Viva la democracia!
                            > >
                            > Plutocracia. I dumped it all into the lap of the person who
                            > volunteered to pay for it. Get this: they came up with something
                            > totally different!

                            There's a shocker.

                            W
                          • DavidH
                            [Sent this mistakenly to Walt s email; now re-posting to the list. ] I see Georgism as not limited to advocating land value taxation. If you define Georgist
                            Message 13 of 27 , May 28, 2010
                              [Sent this mistakenly to Walt's email; now re-posting to the list. ]



                              I see Georgism as not limited to advocating land value taxation. If you define "Georgist" as an adherent of the ideas of Henry George, it also takes in other reforms. Henry George Jr. defined four types of privilege


                              „« I. Private ownership of natural opportunities ;

                              „« II. Tariff and other taxation on production and on its
                              „« fruits;

                              „« III. Special Government grants; and

                              „« IV. Grants under general laws and immunities in the
                              „« courts.


                              These take in many specific types of privilege, including private money issuance, private ownership of public infrastructure, or corporate limited liability and other privileges that inhere in these "artificial persons.¡¨

                              If you define Georgist in that way, it also would mean you are for for radically decentralized government, as Henry George certainly was. I suppose you could always find some sort of designation to indicate that you are not *that* kind of Georgist. But, I understand George's critique of bloated, overly centralized, inefficient and corrupt government as part and parcel of his philosophy and argument against privilege of any sort.

                              Think about it, George wrote the series that became "Social Problems" in the 1870s or 1880s, I believe. Since the federal government as we know it today barely existed, George largely confined his critique to the States, which he saw as accumulating unnecessary and dangerous levels of power and usurping the roles of townships, villages, cities, and counties. What would he say about the God complex of the federal government today? (And why should it take a quote from Henry George for people to realize the amount of government in the U.S. today is beyond ridiculous -- and extremely dangerous?)

                              The good thing about this is that even many people on the left who have convictions and who are thinking, see the sense in decentralizing power. Greens especially are of this bent.

                              I'm all for strategically allying with any cause that is against privilege in any form. That adds to the cause rather than taking from it. This is not a "centrist" movement and never has been. It is radical, and thus it must draw its support from other radical movements that have a partial insight but do not have the full answers.


                              ----
                              If somebody were capable of moving what little there is to the geoist "movement" either right or left or libertarian or whatever, it will have so much more to defend, and will lose 1.5 people for every 1 it picks up.
                              ----

                              It's not picking up that many people that I can detect, so whatever the movement's been doing has not been working. But the ** strength of this movement, I would aver, comes from precisely those areas -- the "fringes" on right and left. IMO those are the only place where real change is going to come from.

                              david harrell.
                            • Joshua Vincent
                              Not Left, Not Right, Just Forward Joshua Vincent Executive Director Henry George Foundation USA/Center for the Study of Economics 413 South 10th Street
                              Message 14 of 27 , May 28, 2010
                                "Not Left, Not Right, Just Forward"



                                Joshua Vincent
                                Executive Director
                                Henry George Foundation USA/Center for the Study of Economics
                                413 South 10th Street
                                Philadelphia, PA 19147
                                215.923.7800 Extension 1
                                www.urbantools.org
                                www.ourcommonwealth.org


                                The Center for the Study of Economics is a 501 (c) 3 non-profit educational foundation.
                                Our mission is to research land value taxation, to assist governments in implementation and to study the effect of land based property taxation where used. We suggest implementation where appropriate but do not support political candidates or become involved in the electoral process.


                                On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 8:07 PM, DavidH <discodave1974@...> wrote:
                                 



                                [Sent this mistakenly to Walt's email; now re-posting to the list. ]

                                I see Georgism as not limited to advocating land value taxation. If you define "Georgist" as an adherent of the ideas of Henry George, it also takes in other reforms. Henry George Jr. defined four types of privilege


                                „« I. Private ownership of natural opportunities ;

                                „« II. Tariff and other taxation on production and on its
                                „« fruits;

                                „« III. Special Government grants; and

                                „« IV. Grants under general laws and immunities in the
                                „« courts.

                                These take in many specific types of privilege, including private money issuance, private ownership of public infrastructure, or corporate limited liability and other privileges that inhere in these "artificial persons.¡¨

                                If you define Georgist in that way, it also would mean you are for for radically decentralized government, as Henry George certainly was. I suppose you could always find some sort of designation to indicate that you are not *that* kind of Georgist. But, I understand George's critique of bloated, overly centralized, inefficient and corrupt government as part and parcel of his philosophy and argument against privilege of any sort.

                                Think about it, George wrote the series that became "Social Problems" in the 1870s or 1880s, I believe. Since the federal government as we know it today barely existed, George largely confined his critique to the States, which he saw as accumulating unnecessary and dangerous levels of power and usurping the roles of townships, villages, cities, and counties. What would he say about the God complex of the federal government today? (And why should it take a quote from Henry George for people to realize the amount of government in the U.S. today is beyond ridiculous -- and extremely dangerous?)

                                The good thing about this is that even many people on the left who have convictions and who are thinking, see the sense in decentralizing power. Greens especially are of this bent.

                                I'm all for strategically allying with any cause that is against privilege in any form. That adds to the cause rather than taking from it. This is not a "centrist" movement and never has been. It is radical, and thus it must draw its support from other radical movements that have a partial insight but do not have the full answers.


                                ----
                                If somebody were capable of moving what little there is to the geoist "movement" either right or left or libertarian or whatever, it will have so much more to defend, and will lose 1.5 people for every 1 it picks up.
                                ----

                                It's not picking up that many people that I can detect, so whatever the movement's been doing has not been working. But the ** strength of this movement, I would aver, comes from precisely those areas -- the "fringes" on right and left. IMO those are the only place where real change is going to come from.

                                david harrell.


                              • Edward Dodson
                                David wrote: I see Georgism as not limited to advocating land value taxation. If you define Georgist as an adherent of the ideas of Henry George, it also
                                Message 15 of 27 , May 28, 2010
                                  David wrote:
                                  I see Georgism as not limited to advocating land value taxation. If you
                                  define "Georgist" as an adherent of the ideas of Henry George, it also takes
                                  in other reforms. Henry George Jr. defined four types of privilege

                                  Ed Dodson here:
                                  Henry George offered a moral philosophy and called for an end to taxation
                                  because taxation -- by his definition -- is a confiscation of legitimate
                                  forms of private property and earned incomes. As others on this list will
                                  attest, there has always been intense debate over acquiescing to describing
                                  the public collection of location rental values as taxation.

                                  In an effort to resurrect Henry George to his rightful position as a leading
                                  socio-political philosopher, my approach has been to describe his principles
                                  as those of "cooperative individualism" -- true individual liberty operating
                                  within a cooperative societal institutional framework. Moreover, I believe
                                  it is fair to describe Thomas Paine as the founder of the movement for
                                  cooperative individualism. With Paine's death the torch he carried fell to
                                  the ground and nearly died out, until Henry George emerged to lift it and
                                  see that it burned bright once again.
                                • walto
                                  ... I think you d need some additional premises to get radically decentralized government from the principles set forth above. ... I ve already responded to
                                  Message 16 of 27 , May 28, 2010
                                    --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "DavidH" <discodave1974@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > [Sent this mistakenly to Walt's email; now re-posting to the list. ]
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > I see Georgism as not limited to advocating land value taxation. If you define "Georgist" as an adherent of the ideas of Henry George, it also takes in other reforms. Henry George Jr. defined four types of privilege
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > „« I. Private ownership of natural opportunities ;
                                    >
                                    > „« II. Tariff and other taxation on production and on its
                                    > „« fruits;
                                    >
                                    > „« III. Special Government grants; and
                                    >
                                    > „« IV. Grants under general laws and immunities in the
                                    > „« courts.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > These take in many specific types of privilege, including private money issuance, private ownership of public infrastructure, or corporate limited liability and other privileges that inhere in these "artificial persons.¡¨
                                    >
                                    > If you define Georgist in that way, it also would mean you are for for radically decentralized government,


                                    I think you'd need some additional premises to get "radically decentralized government from the principles set forth above.


                                    >as Henry George certainly was. I suppose you could always find some sort of designation to indicate that you are not *that* kind of Georgist. But, I understand George's critique of bloated, overly centralized, inefficient and corrupt government as part and parcel of >his philosophy and argument against privilege of any sort.

                                    I've already responded to this in my email to you and in past posts here, but I'll just say again that there can be bloated and inefficient small, decentralized governments and streamlined and efficient big governments.

                                    >
                                    > Think about it, George wrote the series that became "Social Problems" in the 1870s or 1880s, I believe. Since the federal government as we know it today barely existed, George largely confined his critique to the States, which he saw as accumulating unnecessary and dangerous levels of power and usurping the roles of townships, villages, cities, and counties. What would he say about the God complex of the federal government today?

                                    I personally think he'd say (at the time he wrote "Social Problems" anyhow) that the Federal government should be doing considerably more than it is now in several areas. He might also think that, because of technology and globalization, there should be fewer municipal and more regional powers. But who the hell knows, really? And why is it important, anyhow?

                                    >(And why should it take a quote from Henry George

                                    exactly



                                    >for people to realize the amount of government in the U.S. today is >beyond ridiculous -- and extremely dangerous?)


                                    Please. Look, I get that you're a libertarian. Be my guest. My point is pretty simple: not everybody does or will agree with you because one doesn't have to be a libertarian in order to be a geoist.


                                    >
                                    > The good thing about this is that even many people on the left who have convictions and who are thinking, see the sense in decentralizing power. Greens especially are of this bent.


                                    The bad thing is that more are not.


                                    >
                                    > I'm all for strategically allying with any cause that is against privilege in any form. That adds to the cause rather than taking from it. This is not a "centrist" movement and never has been. It is radical, and thus it must draw its support from other radical movements that have a partial insight but do not have the full answers.
                                    >
                                    >

                                    I don't mind allying either. I just don't forget what must be really important to geoists and what's non-geoist seasoning that either I happen to agree with or that I will put up with anyhow for the meat.

                                    W
                                  • John
                                    ... Nice.
                                    Message 17 of 27 , May 29, 2010
                                      --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, Joshua Vincent <joshua@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > "Not Left, Not Right, Just Forward"

                                      Nice.

                                    • Jock Coats
                                      I can t find it now, but I have a feeling that is a saying of someone like Liberal leader Jo Grimond, or perhaps it was Simon Hughes, or someone like that. I
                                      Message 18 of 27 , May 29, 2010
                                        I can't find it now, but I have a feeling that is a saying of someone like Liberal leader Jo Grimond, or perhaps it was Simon Hughes, or someone like that.

                                        I would more suggest "neither left, nor right, but just", or maybe "neither left, nor right, just equitable".

                                        On 29 May 2010, at 09:41, John wrote:

                                        >
                                        > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, Joshua Vincent <joshua@...> wrote:
                                        > >
                                        > > "Not Left, Not Right, Just Forward"
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > Nice.
                                        --
                                        Jock Coats - altoxford.org - Action for Land Tax in Oxford
                                        Warden's Flat 1e, J Block Morrell Hall, OXFORD, OX3 0FF
                                        m: 07769 695767 skype:jock.coats?call
                                        jock.coats@... http://jockcoats.me
                                      • walto
                                        ... Jock, I take it your proposals for revision reflect the fact that now that progressive is a bad word in some quarters, forward is also a no-no.
                                        Message 19 of 27 , May 29, 2010
                                          --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, Jock Coats <jock.coats@...> wrote:
                                          >
                                          > I can't find it now, but I have a feeling that is a saying of someone like Liberal leader Jo Grimond, or perhaps it was Simon Hughes, or someone like that.
                                          >
                                          > I would more suggest "neither left, nor right, but just", or maybe "neither left, nor right, just equitable".
                                          >
                                          > On 29 May 2010, at 09:41, John wrote:
                                          >
                                          > >
                                          > > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, Joshua Vincent <joshua@> wrote:
                                          > > >
                                          > > > "Not Left, Not Right, Just Forward"
                                          > >
                                          > >
                                          > > Nice.
                                          > --
                                          > Jock Coats - altoxford.org - Action for Land Tax in Oxford
                                          > Warden's Flat 1e, J Block Morrell Hall, OXFORD, OX3 0FF
                                          > m: 07769 695767 skype:jock.coats?call
                                          > jock.coats@... http://jockcoats.me
                                          >
                                          Jock, I take it your proposals for revision reflect the fact that now that "progressive" is a bad word in some quarters, "forward" is also a no-no. Political life does go on.

                                          Anyhow, I'm not too interested in these motto discussions myself (unless they involve faux 'voting' of course!) but I've never had too much trouble with David's LVT (or even the old "single tax" moniker. And this is so whether or not (a) a number of people think all taxes are bad; or (b) it isn't REALLY a tax but something way (waaaaaay!) better. This is because (for (a)) if people hate taxes they can be expected to like the prospect all of them being eliminated except one, and (for (b)) those niceties of what some levy people have to pay REALLY is should be kept to textbooks and lovely e-lists. Nobody else gives a tinker's damn.

                                          W
                                        • Fred Foldvary
                                          How about BOTH left and right? Embrace, rather than reject. FredF
                                          Message 20 of 27 , May 29, 2010
                                            How about BOTH left and right?
                                            Embrace, rather than reject.
                                            FredF
                                          • Jeffery J. Smith
                                            ... Our old Green Party slogan from 30 years ago. Worked then, could work now. SMITH, Jeffery J. President, Forum on Geonomics jjs@geonomics.org;
                                            Message 21 of 27 , May 29, 2010
                                              On May 29, 2010, at 1:41 AM, John wrote:
                                               


                                              --- In LandCafe@yahoogroup s.com, Joshua Vincent <joshua@...> wrote:
                                              >
                                              > "Not Left, Not Right, Just Forward"


                                              Nice.

                                              Our old Green Party slogan from 30 years ago. Worked then, could work now.

                                              SMITH, Jeffery J.
                                              President, Forum on Geonomics
                                              Land Rights course: www.course.earthrights.net
                                              Share Earth's worth to prosper and conserve.

                                            • roy_langston1
                                              ... Sorry, but that doesn t say anything without context. Consider something more informative like, Left or Right, Justice on Land Is the Only Way Forward.
                                              Message 22 of 27 , May 29, 2010
                                                --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, Joshua Vincent
                                                <joshua@...> wrote:

                                                > "Not Left, Not Right, Just Forward"

                                                Sorry, but that doesn't say anything without context.

                                                Consider something more informative like, "Left or Right,
                                                Justice on Land Is the Only Way Forward."

                                                -- Roy Langston
                                              • Dave Wetzel
                                                ... This assumes that socialists do not believe in liberty and tells socialists that Henry George and LVT is not for them. Best Wishes and Socialist
                                                Message 23 of 27 , May 30, 2010

                                                  Walto submitted the following Motto:
                                                  >"Geoism. We may not be essentially libertarian, but
                                                  > we're more compatible with libertarians than we are
                                                  > with socialists!"
                                                  This assumes that socialists do not believe in liberty and tells socialists that Henry George and LVT is not for them.
                                                   

                                                  Best Wishes and Socialist Greetings!,

                                                  Dave Wetzel
                                                • walto
                                                  ... IT WAS A JOKE. w
                                                  Message 24 of 27 , May 30, 2010
                                                    --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, Dave Wetzel <davewetzel42@...> wrote:
                                                    >
                                                    > Walto submitted the following Motto:
                                                    > >"Geoism. We may not be essentially libertarian, but
                                                    > > we're more compatible with libertarians than we are
                                                    > > with socialists!"
                                                    > This assumes that socialists do not believe in liberty and tells socialists
                                                    > that Henry George and LVT is not for them.
                                                    >
                                                    >

                                                    IT WAS A JOKE.

                                                    w
                                                  • John
                                                    ... Roy, the prize was £50,000 in 1959 which was 3 to 4 dollars to the pound then. 18 years after it was won.
                                                    Message 25 of 27 , May 31, 2010
                                                      --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston1" <roy_langston1@...>
                                                      wrote:

                                                      > We geoists are big on competition, so maybe it would
                                                      > be interesting to have a little competition to
                                                      > create a good, universally applicable motto or slogan
                                                      > (what we in the PR biz call a "position line") for
                                                      > land rent recovery. Or even better, get Schalkenbach
                                                      > or one of the other foundations to put up some prize
                                                      > money, and make it a BIG competition. The Kremer
                                                      > Prize, a mere $50K, stimulated many millions of
                                                      > dollars in research and development on human-powered
                                                      > heavier-than-air flight, solving in 20 years a
                                                      > problem that had stumped the best minds for centuries.

                                                      Roy, the prize was £50,000 in 1959 which was 3 to 4 dollars to the
                                                      pound then. 18 years after it was won.
                                                    • roy_langston1
                                                      ... That would, historically, be more of an observation than an assumption... ... And that s more accurately what they told Henry when he wouldn t go along
                                                      Message 26 of 27 , May 31, 2010
                                                        --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, Dave Wetzel
                                                        <davewetzel42@...> wrote:

                                                        > Walto submitted the following Motto:
                                                        > >"Geoism. We may not be essentially libertarian, but
                                                        > > we're more compatible with libertarians than we are
                                                        > > with socialists!"
                                                        > This assumes that socialists do not believe in liberty

                                                        That would, historically, be more of an observation than
                                                        an assumption...

                                                        > and tells socialists that Henry George and LVT is not
                                                        > for them.

                                                        And that's more accurately what they told Henry when he
                                                        wouldn't go along with confiscation of privately
                                                        produced capital.

                                                        I await the explanation of how collective ownership of
                                                        capital will permit measurement and recovery of the full
                                                        economic rent of land. On what basis will competing
                                                        prospective users bid for it?

                                                        -- Roy Langston
                                                      • walto
                                                        ... it was a joke.
                                                        Message 27 of 27 , May 31, 2010
                                                          --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston1" <roy_langston1@...> wrote:
                                                          >
                                                          > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, Dave Wetzel
                                                          > davewetzel42@ wrote:
                                                          >
                                                          > > Walto submitted the following Motto:
                                                          > > >"Geoism. We may not be essentially libertarian, but
                                                          > > > we're more compatible with libertarians than we are
                                                          > > > with socialists!"
                                                          > > This assumes that socialists do not believe in liberty
                                                          >
                                                          > That would, historically, be more of an observation than
                                                          > an assumption...
                                                          >
                                                          > > and tells socialists that Henry George and LVT is not
                                                          > > for them.
                                                          >
                                                          > And that's more accurately what they told Henry when he
                                                          > wouldn't go along with confiscation of privately
                                                          > produced capital.
                                                          >
                                                          > I await the explanation of how collective ownership of
                                                          > capital will permit measurement and recovery of the full
                                                          > economic rent of land. On what basis will competing
                                                          > prospective users bid for it?
                                                          >
                                                          > -- Roy Langston
                                                          >

                                                          it was a joke.
                                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.