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

Re: Communism killed Geoism/|LVT

Expand Messages
  • John
    ... I tend to answer something similar. ... As right as you are, that would cut no ice with the averages man. I tend to use the term economic justice .
    Message 1 of 5 , Jul 5 6:01 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston1" <roy_langston1@...> wrote:
      >
      > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "John" burns-john@
      > wrote:
      >
      > > A question I am always asked is, "if it is so good why
      > > wasn't it adopted?"
      >
      > Opposition from very rich and powerful parasites.

      I tend to answer something similar.
       
      > > When I explain that Geoism distributed the wealth of a
      > > society more evenly I tend to get these comments:
      > >
      > > * It is Communism, as you are taking from the rich.
      >
      > Response: "Nope. Wrong. Communists (and socialists)
      > pretend capital is land in order to justify stealing
      > capital, capitalists pretend land is capital in order to
      > justify stealing land. They are both stealing. Only
      > geoists are honest and don't want to steal anything.
      > Only geoists advocate that each person should be rewarded
      > according to their contributions to production."

      As right as you are, that would cut no ice with the averages man.  I tend to use the term "economic justice".
       
      > They may respond that the landowner is contributing land
      > to production, but of course, he is not. The land was
      > already there, ready to use, with no help from him or
      > anyone else. The landowner's only function is to demand
      > payment for it. They will then spew all sorts of garbage
      > in their efforts to avoid knowing the truth, but you can
      > always destroy them with one, simple question, a question
      > no one has ever been able to answer, and no one ever will:
      >
      > "How, exactly, is production aided by the landowner's
      > demand that the producer pay HIM for what government, the
      > community and nature provide?"

      Good response. I had a talk with an estate agent last week and hit on the topic.  he was bright but found it difficult to accept that the value in land is not the occupiers and created by the community which it should reclaim.
       
      > Do not let them get away with evading this question, and
      > you will always win the argument (unless they are the
      > forum moderator, in which case they will ban you).

      :)
       
      > > * I am jealous of the rich.
      >
      > Response: "When, in the whole history of the world, has
      > it ever been posible for men of conscience to oppose
      > injustice and not be dishonestly accused of envy for its
      > beneficiaries?"

      Most will not understand that. I mention, 

      "Most of the wealth is with a few percentage of the population, so why is wanting economic justice being jealous?" 
       
      > > However it must be put forward in a manner the average
      > > man can understand. Otherwise it will get nowhere.
      >
      > "Everything should be made as simple as possible. But no
      > simpler." -- Albert Einstein

      Good quote.

    • Harry Pollard
      Roy said: Response: Nope. Wrong. Communists (and socialists) pretend capital is land in order to justify stealing capital, capitalists pretend land is
      Message 2 of 5 , Jul 5 10:11 AM
      • 0 Attachment

        Roy said:

         

        Response: "Nope. Wrong. Communists (and socialists)
        pretend capital is land in order to justify stealing
        capital, capitalists pretend land is capital in order to
        justify stealing land.”

         

        In a nutshell.

         

        Harry

         

         

         

        From: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:LandCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of roy_langston1
        Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 11:25 PM
        To: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [LandCafe] Re: Communism killed Geoism/|LVT

         

         

        --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "John" <burns-john@...>
        wrote:

        > A question I am always asked is, "if it is so good why
        > wasn't it adopted?"

        Opposition from very rich and powerful parasites.

        > When I explain that Geoism distributed the wealth of a
        > society more evenly I tend to get these comments:
        > * It is Communism, as you are taking from the rich.

        Response: "Nope. Wrong. Communists (and socialists)
        pretend capital is land in order to justify stealing
        capital, capitalists pretend land is capital in order to
        justify stealing land. They are both stealing. Only
        geoists are honest and don't want to steal anything.
        Only geoists advocate that each person should be rewarded
        according to their contributions to production."

        They may respond that the landowner is contributing land
        to production, but of course, he is not. The land was
        already there, ready to use, with no help from him or
        anyone else. The landowner's only function is to demand
        payment for it. They will then spew all sorts of garbage
        in their efforts to avoid knowing the truth, but you can
        always destroy them with one, simple question, a question
        no one has ever been able to answer, and no one ever will:

        "How, exactly, is production aided by the landowner's
        demand that the producer pay HIM for what government, the
        community and nature provide?"

        Do not let them get away with evading this question, and
        you will always win the argument (unless they are the
        forum moderator, in which case they will ban you).

        > * I am jealous of the rich.

        Response: "When, in the whole history of the world, has
        it ever been posible for men of conscience to oppose
        injustice and not be dishonestly accused of envy for its
        beneficiaries?"

        > However it must be put forward in a manner the average
        > man can understand. Otherwise it will get nowhere.

        "Everything should be made as simple as possible. But no
        simpler." -- Albert Einstein

        -- Roy Langston

      • roy_langston1
        ... Why not? The average man works for a living, but does not get to keep the fruits of his labor because capitalists (and depending on the country,
        Message 3 of 5 , Jul 5 10:36 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "John" <burns-john@...>
          wrote:

          > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston1"
          > <roy_langston1@> wrote:
          > >
          > > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "John" burns-john@
          > > wrote:
          > >
          > > > When I explain that Geoism distributed the wealth of a
          > > > society more evenly I tend to get these comments:> >
          > > > * It is Communism, as you are taking from the rich.
          > >
          > > Response: "Nope. Wrong. Communists (and socialists)
          > > pretend capital is land in order to justify stealing
          > > capital, capitalists pretend land is capital in order to
          > > justify stealing land. They are both stealing. Only
          > > geoists are honest and don't want to steal anything.
          > > Only geoists advocate that each person should be rewarded
          > > according to their contributions to production."
          >
          > As right as you are, that would cut no ice with the
          > averages man.

          Why not? The average man works for a living, but does not
          get to keep the fruits of his labor because capitalists (and depending on the country, socialists) steal it from him.
          Does being robbed of half their disposable income cut no ice
          with them, either? Put it to them exactly that way: "Do you
          enjoy being robbed of half what you earn so rich, greedy,
          idle parasites can get something for nothing?

          > I tend to use the term "economic justice".

          I tend to tell them, "The productive, like you, must pay
          taxes to government to fund the services and infrastructure
          society needs, and must then pay landowners for access to
          the services and infrastructure your taxes just paid for.
          You pay for government TWICE so that landowners can pocket
          one of the payments in return for exactly nothing. Isn't
          it hard enough supporting yourself and your family and the government? Do you really want to support rich, greedy,
          idle, parasitic landowners too? Aren't you tired of
          carrying that burden? Aren't you tired of running on
          the treadmill that powers their escalator?"

          > > > * I am jealous of the rich.
          > >
          > > Response: "When, in the whole history of the world, has
          > > it ever been posible for men of conscience to oppose
          > > injustice and not be dishonestly accused of envy for its
          > > beneficiaries?"
          > Most will not understand that.

          Then make it even simpler: "OK, so, no matter how much
          wealth the system steals from you and gives to the idle,
          parasitic rich, if you ever object to being robbed for
          their benefit, it means you are just jealous of them?"

          > I mention, "Most of the wealth is with a few percentage
          > of the population, so why is wanting economic justice
          > being jealous?"

          They probably won't get it until you show them why that
          distribution is unjust: "Am I also just being jealous if
          I object to being robbed by a thug on the street? I'm
          just jealous of him? Really? Run that one by me again."

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