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

Gal Alperovitz writes solid essay on unearned increment...

Expand Messages
  • Joshua Vincent
    The Undeserving Rich is crisply defined, and well done Society has danced around the structural dysfunctions that western nations and their clients have
    Message 1 of 7 , Sep 30, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      The "Undeserving Rich" is crisply defined, and well done  Society has danced around the structural dysfunctions that western nations and their clients have constructed since socialism and capitalism both claimed the moral and practical  high ground in the last century.  

      We ended yup with privilege battling privilege, as the commonwealth was left out in the cold. We can do better.
      http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2010/0310alperovitzdaly.html
      Joshua Vincent, Executive Director
      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.


    • Scott on the Spot
      Interesting article. Unlike Land, however, I don t see how we can, or should, pay for Rent on Prior Knowledge although we certainly all benefit. A
      Message 2 of 7 , Oct 6, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Interesting article. Unlike Land, however, I don't see how we can, or should, pay for "Rent on Prior Knowledge" although we certainly all benefit. A corollary to this article would be that if we took away all the trappings of civilization, and had to rely on our hands and wits, the wealth disparity would all but disappear. Sure, some would be better hunters, and some better hut-builders, but you would never have the situation where 1% owns more wealth than the bottom 120 million Americans (most likely, there would not survive 120 million Americans).
        But this goes beyond George's Rent on Land to a Rent on (mostly past) knowledge. To whom do we pay? And how is one to judge what knowledge is most valuable? Is it really more valuable to have knowledge of lucrative investment opportunities, as the Buffet example illustrates, or is just that, at this time and place, speculative investing is so amply rewarded by our tax and market rules? If hard work was all that was required to accumulate wealth, all migrant farm workers would be millionaires. Clearly, knowledge is important, but why does society currently allow the top 25 hedge fund managers to AVERAGE a billion each last year, while a billion dollars would pay 20,000 teacher salaries? I remember my best teachers, but my best fund managers? Not so much.
        Here's a thought for the day: Maybe the only real talent Financiers have is getting people to entrust money to them, whether privately or from the government. Maybe investing it wisely is actually a secondary talent, or, given the recent bailouts, maybe not a talent they have, on average, at all? Scary thought...

        --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, Joshua Vincent <joshua@...> wrote:
        >
        > The "Undeserving Rich" is crisply defined, and well done Society has danced
        > around the structural dysfunctions that western nations and
        > their clients have constructed since socialism and capitalism both claimed
        > the moral and practical high ground in the last century.
        >
        > We ended yup with privilege battling privilege, as the commonwealth was left
        > out in the cold. We can do better.
        > http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2010/0310alperovitzdaly.html
        > Joshua Vincent, Executive Director
        > 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.
        >
      • Harry Pollard
        Scott, As a general rule, if a person became a millionaire, or billionaire, through his own hard work, initiative, cleverness, etc -- his wealth should be left
        Message 3 of 7 , Oct 6, 2010
        • 0 Attachment

          Scott,

           

          As a general rule, if a person became a millionaire, or billionaire, through his own hard work, initiative, cleverness, etc -- his wealth should be left alone and untaxed.

           

          If a person became a millionaire, or billionaire, by virtue of his ownership of privilege of some kind, his tax should be 100%. In other words, his privilege should be ended.

           

          Harry

           

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

          Henry George School of Los Angeles

          Box 655

          Tujunga  CA  9104

          818 352-4141

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

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

          From: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:LandCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Scott on the Spot
          Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 10:28 AM
          To: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [LandCafe] Re: Gal Alperovitz writes solid essay on unearned increment...

           

           

          Interesting article. Unlike Land, however, I don't see how we can, or should, pay for "Rent on Prior Knowledge" although we certainly all benefit. A corollary to this article would be that if we took away all the trappings of civilization, and had to rely on our hands and wits, the wealth disparity would all but disappear. Sure, some would be better hunters, and some better hut-builders, but you would never have the situation where 1% owns more wealth than the bottom 120 million Americans (most likely, there would not survive 120 million Americans).
          But this goes beyond George's Rent on Land to a Rent on (mostly past) knowledge. To whom do we pay? And how is one to judge what knowledge is most valuable? Is it really more valuable to have knowledge of lucrative investment opportunities, as the Buffet example illustrates, or is just that, at this time and place, speculative investing is so amply rewarded by our tax and market rules? If hard work was all that was required to accumulate wealth, all migrant farm workers would be millionaires. Clearly, knowledge is important, but why does society currently allow the top 25 hedge fund managers to AVERAGE a billion each last year, while a billion dollars would pay 20,000 teacher salaries? I remember my best teachers, but my best fund managers? Not so much.
          Here's a thought for the day: Maybe the only real talent Financiers have is getting people to entrust money to them, whether privately or from the government. Maybe investing it wisely is actually a secondary talent, or, given the recent bailouts, maybe not a talent they have, on average, at all? Scary thought...

          --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, Joshua Vincent <joshua@...> wrote:
          >
          > The "Undeserving Rich" is crisply defined, and well done Society has danced
          > around the structural dysfunctions that western nations and
          > their clients have constructed since socialism and capitalism both claimed
          > the moral and practical high ground in the last century.
          >
          > We ended yup with privilege battling privilege, as the commonwealth was left
          > out in the cold. We can do better.
          > http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2010/0310alperovitzdaly.html
          > Joshua Vincent, Executive Director
          > 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.
          >

        • Scott on the Spot
          Yes, exactly. Only, that is not what we re doing. The hedge fund managers created nothing, and whatever they made came from someone else - a zero sum game in
          Message 4 of 7 , Oct 9, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            Yes, exactly.
            Only, that is not what we're doing. The hedge fund managers created nothing, and whatever they made came from someone else - a zero sum game in which we are all zeroed in the crosshairs. It is virtually impossible to amass a billion without speculation derived in some way from land.
            Believe me, if someone wants to get wealthy out of building a fusion reactor, I'll gladly step aside and let him keep whatever he makes that does not come from nature.

            --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Pollard" <henrygeorgeschool@...> wrote:
            >
            > Scott,
            >
            >
            >
            > As a general rule, if a person became a millionaire, or billionaire, through
            > his own hard work, initiative, cleverness, etc -- his wealth should be left
            > alone and untaxed.
            >
            >
            >
            > If a person became a millionaire, or billionaire, by virtue of his ownership
            > of privilege of some kind, his tax should be 100%. In other words, his
            > privilege should be ended.
            >
            >
            >
            > Harry
            >
            >
            >
            > ********************************
            >
            > Henry George School of Los Angeles
            >
            > Box 655
            >
            > Tujunga CA 9104
            >
            > 818 352-4141
            >
            > ********************************
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > From: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:LandCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
            > Of Scott on the Spot
            > Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 10:28 AM
            > To: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: [LandCafe] Re: Gal Alperovitz writes solid essay on unearned
            > increment...
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Interesting article. Unlike Land, however, I don't see how we can, or
            > should, pay for "Rent on Prior Knowledge" although we certainly all benefit.
            > A corollary to this article would be that if we took away all the trappings
            > of civilization, and had to rely on our hands and wits, the wealth disparity
            > would all but disappear. Sure, some would be better hunters, and some better
            > hut-builders, but you would never have the situation where 1% owns more
            > wealth than the bottom 120 million Americans (most likely, there would not
            > survive 120 million Americans).
            > But this goes beyond George's Rent on Land to a Rent on (mostly past)
            > knowledge. To whom do we pay? And how is one to judge what knowledge is most
            > valuable? Is it really more valuable to have knowledge of lucrative
            > investment opportunities, as the Buffet example illustrates, or is just
            > that, at this time and place, speculative investing is so amply rewarded by
            > our tax and market rules? If hard work was all that was required to
            > accumulate wealth, all migrant farm workers would be millionaires. Clearly,
            > knowledge is important, but why does society currently allow the top 25
            > hedge fund managers to AVERAGE a billion each last year, while a billion
            > dollars would pay 20,000 teacher salaries? I remember my best teachers, but
            > my best fund managers? Not so much.
            > Here's a thought for the day: Maybe the only real talent Financiers have is
            > getting people to entrust money to them, whether privately or from the
            > government. Maybe investing it wisely is actually a secondary talent, or,
            > given the recent bailouts, maybe not a talent they have, on average, at all?
            > Scary thought...
            >
            > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com <mailto:LandCafe%40yahoogroups.com> , Joshua
            > Vincent <joshua@> wrote:
            > >
            > > The "Undeserving Rich" is crisply defined, and well done Society has
            > danced
            > > around the structural dysfunctions that western nations and
            > > their clients have constructed since socialism and capitalism both claimed
            > > the moral and practical high ground in the last century.
            > >
            > > We ended yup with privilege battling privilege, as the commonwealth was
            > left
            > > out in the cold. We can do better.
            > > http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2010/0310alperovitzdaly.html
            > > Joshua Vincent, Executive Director
            > > 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.
            > >
            >
          • Fred Foldvary
            From: Scott on the Spot ... Why do you think so? Fred
            Message 5 of 7 , Oct 9, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              From: Scott on the Spot <ssbaker305@...>
              > The hedge fund managers created nothing, and whatever they made came from someone else - a zero sum game in which we are all zeroed in the crosshairs.<

              Why do you think so?

              Fred
            • Scott on the Spot
              Let me count the ways: 1. They distort markets. I remember when hedge funds were parking oil tankers at sea in 2008, waiting for the price of oil to go up.
              Message 6 of 7 , Oct 10, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                Let me count the ways:
                1. They distort markets. I remember when hedge funds were parking oil tankers at sea in 2008, waiting for the price of oil to go up. Morgan Stanley too. Rolling Stone accuses Goldman Sacks of keeping food off the market by corning the corn/ethanol market in 2008, and making people starve to death in third world countries.
                2. Hedge funds can and do go short, unlike mutual funds, and spread rumors and outright lies (just try to catch them!), knocking down perfectly good companies, just to make money on the downside.
                3. Hedge funds shelter income in Capital Gains, taxed at only 15% and starve the government of badly needed funds, making the middle class pay more and increasing the debt. Sure, we should have Resource Fees, and tax the resources before the hedgies get their greedy little paws on them, but then we'd be in a totally different world, wouldn't we?
                4. Hedge funds engage in technical high-speed trading, introducing volatility that benefits no one but them, and makes companies uncertain as to what money they will have in the future. Although the market pricing mechanism is partly to blame (e.g. people who merely hold stock don't get a vote on price), a single hedge fund, doing a legal trade, may have brought about the flash crash last May, says the too-slow-to-respond SEC now. (A tobin tax on trading, at <1% per trade, would eliminate most of this and/or raise billions) This scares away the average investor and makes the markets a plaything of the nimble and tapped in, not the masses to support businesses.

                Sure, there are occasional idealists like the son-in-law-to-be in Wall Street II: Money Never Sleeps, who put his money into a fusion power startup, but these are the very rare exceptions, and there are better ways of allocating this kind of money through public voting and bodies (even the DOE). By and large, the hedge fund managers who reap the staggering rewards have just sucked it out of the economy at large and left us all poorer.
                --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, Fred Foldvary <ffoldvary@...> wrote:
                >
                > From: Scott on the Spot <ssbaker305@...>
                > > The hedge fund managers created nothing, and whatever they made came from someone else - a zero sum game in which we are all zeroed in the crosshairs.<
                >
                > Why do you think so?
                >
                > Fred
                >
              • roy_langston1
                ... We don t all benefit EQUALLY. Landowners benefit most. Unfortunately, Alperovitz and Daly can t see the cat. They completely miss the fact that the common
                Message 7 of 7 , Oct 10, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "Scott on the Spot"
                  <ssbaker305@...> wrote:

                  > Interesting article. Unlike Land, however, I don't
                  > see how we can, or should, pay for "Rent on Prior
                  > Knowledge" although we certainly all benefit.

                  We don't all benefit EQUALLY. Landowners benefit most.

                  Unfortunately, Alperovitz and Daly can't see the cat.
                  They completely miss the fact that the common heritage of
                  knowledge is NOT free: we have to pay landowners and other
                  privileged interests such as patent and copyright owners
                  and debt money issuers (private banks) full market value
                  for any economic advantage it confers.

                  How much can anyone profit from the common heritage of
                  knowledge while living and working where land yields no
                  rent? The entire difference between that and the value
                  of all the opportunity that the common heritage of
                  knowledge confers elsewhere goes to the landowner.

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