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

Re: Time for a new Political Party - a Georgist/Geoist Party?

Expand Messages
  • Jason
    Roy Langston: I would be interested in an exchange of ideas on how to work effectively within the existing left-of-center parties. Jason: Well, there s the
    Message 1 of 27 , Oct 6, 2010
    • 0 Attachment

      Roy Langston: I would be interested in an exchange of ideas on how to work effectively within the existing left-of-center parties.


      Jason: Well, there's the Democratic Freedom Caucus, which advocates for shifting taxes to LVT and natural resources, www.democraticfreedomcaucus.org

      One could also advocate for a geoist club within the Democratic Party, (e.g., the Democratic Geoist Club?) 

       

       

      --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston1" <roy_langston1@...> wrote:
      >
      > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, Scott Baker
      > ssbaker305@ wrote:
      >
      > > Last night, we had our kickoff meeting for Common
      > > Ground-NYC for FY 2011. We discussed many fine
      > > ideas and made real progress, but there was one
      > > that seemed especially ambitious, even to me, and
      > > that was to create a new Geoist Political Party
      >
      > Geoists don't agree on enough to form a viable party.
      > We must bring the truth to existing parties and show
      > them why their way can never work, and our way must
      > necessarily work, in achieving their own (putative)
      > objectives.
      >
      > > Is our time now? To see how the radical center
      > > might be electrified - and that's where the votes
      > > are, let's not forget - please also read my article
      > > from Op Ed News and GroundSwell a year ago:Creating
      > > a Geonomic Political Party in New York State
      > >
      > > http://www.opednews.com/articles/Creating-a-Geonomic-Politi-by-Scott-Baker-091208-229.html
      > >
      > > Please let me know your opinions, suggestions and
      > > yes, criticisms, of this ambitious but oh-so-needed
      > > reform party.
      >
      > You seem to miss the fact that a geoist party would in
      > fact be a one-issue party, like the Marijuana Party.
      > It's the biggest issue, and dominates almost all the
      > other issues, but it is still just one issue. It is
      > not possible to build a viable party around one issue.
      >
      > IMO we should just recognize that in capitalist
      > countries we are more egalitarian than -- to the left
      > of -- the mainstream, and just work within the largest
      > party on the left. Yes, it is like hitting your head
      > against a stone wall, as Sue observed. But IMO, if you
      > are going to be political, there is no more productive
      > use of your energies than to join the mainstream party
      > that is closest to your views on other issues, and
      > take every opportunity to educate them about land.
      >
      > I would be interested in an exchange of ideas on how
      > to work effectively within the existing left-of-center
      > parties.
      >
      > -- Roy Langston
      >

    • Jason
      Hi Scott, OK. So when you say we , how many geoists in New York state are interested in starting a Geoist Party (or are at least interested in exploring the
      Message 2 of 27 , Oct 6, 2010
      • 0 Attachment

        Hi Scott,

        OK. So when you say "we", how many geoists in New York state are interested in starting a Geoist Party (or are at least interested in exploring the idea)? And are these people spread out throughout the state, or are they concentrated in just one particular part of the state?

        And as another possibility, would New York geoists consider developing a state chapter of the Democratic Freedom Caucus, www.democraticfreedomcaucus.org ?

        ---Jason

        --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "Scott on the Spot" <ssbaker305@...> wrote:
        >
        > I guess I should have emphasized, as my article states, we are only trying to see if a Geoist party is viable in NY State, for now. Frankly, even that will be a huge undertaking.
        >
        > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "Jason" nysa71@ wrote:
        > >
        > >
        > > Hi Scott,
        > >
        > > I think if you wanted a Geoist Party to have any chance of even being on
        > > the radar screen in 2012, we'd have to figure out a way to start a
        > > grassroots effort throughout the states of Iowa and New Hampshire, (at
        > > the very least), ASAP.
        > >
        > > Just my two cents!
        > >
        > > Jason
        > >
        > >
        > > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, Scott Baker <ssbaker305@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Last night, we had our kickoff meeting for Common Ground-NYC for FY
        > > 2011. We
        > > > discussed many fine ideas and made real progress, but there was one
        > > that seemed
        > > > especially ambitious, even to me, and that was to create a new Geoist
        > > Political
        > > > Party (I refrain from calling it a Georgist party because of the
        > > biography trap
        > > > and the need to modernize George, though he remains still, sadly,
        > > ahead of our
        > > > time as he was of his own). Yet there is interest from our members.
        > > >
        > > > Today, there was this article by Thomas Friedman of the NY Times:
        > > > Third Party
        > > >
        > > Rising:http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/03/opinion/03friedman.html?_r=1&hp
        > > > in which he says "...in talks here and elsewhere I continue to be
        > > astounded by
        > > > the level of disgust with Washington, D.C., and our two-party system
        > > â€" so
        > > > much so that I am ready to hazard a prediction: Barring a
        > > transformation of
        > > > the Democratic and Republican Parties, there is going to be a serious
        > > third
        > > > party candidate in 2012, with a serious political movement behind him
        > > or her â€"
        > > > one definitely big enough to impact the election’s outcome.
        > > >
        > > > There is a revolution brewing in the country, and it is not just on
        > > the right
        > > > wing but in the radical center. I know of at least two serious groups,
        > > one on
        > > > the East Coast and one on the West Coast, developing “third
        > > parties” to
        > > > challenge our stagnating two-party duopoly that has been presiding
        > > over our
        > > > nation’s steady incremental decline"
        > > >
        > > > Indeed. Is our time now? To see how the radical center might be
        > > electrified -
        > > > and that's where the votes are, let's not forget - please also read my
        > > article
        > > > from Op Ed News and GroundSwell a year ago:Creating a Geonomic
        > > Political Party
        > > > in New York State
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > http://www.opednews.com/articles/Creating-a-Geonomic-Politi-by-Scott-Bak\
        > > er-091208-229.html
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Please let me know your opinions, suggestions and yes, criticisms, of
        > > this
        > > > ambitious but oh-so-needed reform party.
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Scott Baker - Op Ed News Journalist/Senior Editor; Author; President:
        > > Common
        > > > Ground - NYC
        > > >
        > > > Petitions:
        > > > -- Set up a Land Value Tax & untax ALL productive activities to make
        > > California
        > > > Healthy, Wealthy, and Prosperous
        > > > -- Set up a State Bank in California to Terminate the debt
        > > > -- Set up a State Bank For Florida
        > > > -- Complete the East Side Manhattan Greenway from 38-61 Streets and
        > > save bikers,
        > > > help the environment, and clear up traffic
        > > > -- Tax Vacant & Unused Land to Return its value to the Community
        > > > -- Untax Production and Wages while taxing the use/abuse of natural
        > > resources.
        > > > Polluters pay while workers and entrepreneurs profit from true
        > > production
        > > > -- Close New York State's budget Gap with money from its own agencies
        > > by setting
        > > > up a State Bank
        > > >
        > >
        >

      • Harry Pollard
        Correct. Jolly good! Harry ******************************** Henry George School of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 9104 818 352-4141
        Message 3 of 27 , Oct 6, 2010
        • 0 Attachment

          “Correct.”

           

          Jolly good!

           

          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 10:35 AM
          To: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [LandCafe] Re: Time for a new Political Party - a Georgist/Geoist Party?

           

           

          Yes, Carl Milsted on Holisticpolitices.org, makes exactly that point, with pretty graphs too. The two dimensional linear model of left vs. right is as wrong as it is outdated. George was neither Left nor Right, just Correct. We got a lot of educatin'to do...

          --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, s walton <sns@...> wrote:
          >
          > Hey wait -what about the libertarians; there are least 5 libertarians copied
          > on this list-be they be Big L party members or small L -libs who are not
          > party members; they include at least one former state LP chair and two
          > people organized the 1991 LP National Convention in Chicago.
          >
          > Having hit my head against a stone wall both inside and outside of the major
          > & minor political parties one too many times, I am not inclined to start a
          > new one, UNTIL we have the CRITICAL MASS and don't BORE people to death with
          > our message..
          >
          > Sue Walton
          > Administrator
          > Council of Georgist Organizations
          > former LP State Chair of Illinois
          >
          >
          > On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 3:42 AM, Erika Timar <erikatimar@...> wrote:
          >
          > > Some thoughts...
          > >
          > > 1) What about the Green Party? Wouldn't there be more to gain by having
          > > them line up with the Georgist platform officially, rather than starting
          > > form scratch? I thought the Canadian Greens were already Georgist...
          > >
          > > 2) Geo - I, too, like the root, but it should end differently. Geon, or
          > > something. All the vowels in Geoist take away form the impact of the word
          > > (and it might sound too much like Maoist).
          > >
          > > 3) Bruce Oatman once said that the best wording for Georgism was probably
          > > "humane capitalism." I think that phrase explains a lot more to someone
          > > who's never heard of it than does "single tax," "land value tax," or
          > > "Georgism." I hear people complaining about capitalism all the time, and
          > > "humane capitalism" is a great way to bring up George's alternative.
          > >
          > > 4) If we going to define it as neither left nor right, would it be
          > > possible to suggest a position so alternative that it isn't even on the
          > > continuum, but on another plane, or sphere, entirely? Here I call to mind
          > > the image of the horizontal tricolor flag-shaped chart that Cay Hehner uses
          > > to compare capitalism, communism and Georgism. Imagine the flag of the
          > > Netherlands. In capitalism, you keep 2/3 of your earnings (2 horizonatal
          > > stripes) and give 1/3 (1 horizontal stripe) to the government. In
          > > communism, the proportions are reversed. In Georgism, the whole flag is
          > > reversed-- think of the French flag now-- and you give to the government
          > > just your income from rent.
          > >
          > > I'm afraid I have not articulated this very well, but if it were possible
          > > to re-imagine the political spectrum to accommodate a completely different
          > > paradigm, it could be an incredibly powerful tool in getting the word out.
          > > I'm talking about the importance of words and imagery-- how, say, Geo
          > > Solution would mean something more than Geo Party, and how a Venn Diagram,
          > > for example, can convey so much.
          > >
          > > Thoughts?
          > >
          > > --- On *Sun, 10/3/10, Scott Baker <ssbaker305@...>* wrote:
          > >
          > >
          > > From: Scott Baker <ssbaker305@...>
          > > Subject: Time for a new Political Party - a Georgist/Geoist Party?
          > > To: TaxShift@yahoogroups.com, LandCafe@yahoogroups.com
          > > Cc: "anthony persaud" <anthony.persaud@...>, O-CHAR@...,
          > > allen@..., ANDRWMAZZ@..., dojochuck@...,
          > > yanni.tzili@..., yokoonojapan@..., "Cay Hehner" <
          > > chehner.hengeoschool@...>, "Jerry Hilliard" <theopenmindjh@...>,
          > > quisiagonzalez@..., billyfitzgerald@..., dsgarvin@...,
          > > "Scott Baker" <ssbaker305@...>, billyfitzgerald@...,
          > > bradnield@..., branis@..., bruceoatman@...,
          > > cbee1949@..., "Ray Charlotte Charlotte" <O-CHAR@...>, "Lindy
          > > Davies" <lindy@...>, djkebk@..., dsgarvin@...,
          > > erikatimar@..., esteban.rodriguez@...,
          > > fred43g@..., gbastian@..., gherman14@...,
          > > guy.komaclo@..., "Cay Hehner" <karryskanda@...>, "Jerry
          > > Hilliard" <theopenmindjh@...>, htr@..., j.schoonmaker@...,
          > > jstratton9@..., "Eric Lima" <elimey37@...>, "Jean MEVOIT" <
          > > jumevo@...>, mikecurtisarden@..., mlandriscina@...,
          > > monkeybuddha.taichi@..., mstoddard1@..., "Dorothy Williams
          > > Pereira" <dorothy8ny@...>, roman_jeannette@..., "RITA ROWAN" <
          > > rgrowan@...>, schalkenba@..., sns@..., "Nadine
          > > Stoner" <nadstoner@...>, taurus66li@..., terpaller@...,
          > > tgwartney@..., tobyl1@..., vancehinton@...,
          > > vestronic@..., "Josh Vincent" <joshua@...>,
          > > williamjhanman@..., wyn@..., "Yanni" <
          > > yanni.chill@...>
          > > Date: Sunday, October 3, 2010, 5:52 AM
          > >
          > > Last night, we had our kickoff meeting for Common Ground-NYC for FY 2011.
          > > We discussed many fine ideas and made real progress, but there was one that
          > > seemed especially ambitious, even to me, and that was to create a new Geoist
          > > Political Party (I refrain from calling it a Georgist party because of the
          > > biography trap and the need to modernize George, though he remains still,
          > > sadly, ahead of our time as he was of his own). Yet there is interest from
          > > our members.
          > >
          > > Today, there was this article by Thomas Friedman of the NY Times:
          > > Third Party Rising:
          > > http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/03/opinion/03friedman.html?_r=1&hp
          > > in which he says "...in talks here and elsewhere I continue to be
          > > astounded by the level of disgust with Washington, D.C., and our two-party
          > > system — so much so that I am ready to hazard a prediction: Barring a
          > > transformation of the Democratic and Republican Parties, there is going to
          > > be a serious third party candidate in 2012, with a serious political
          > > movement behind him or her — one definitely big enough to impact the
          > > election's outcome.
          > >
          > > There is a revolution brewing in the country, and it is not just on the
          > > right wing but in the radical center. I know of at least two serious groups,
          > > one on the East Coast and one on the West Coast, developing "third parties"
          > > to challenge our stagnating two-party duopoly that has been presiding over
          > > our nation's steady incremental decline"
          > >
          > >
          > > Indeed. Is our time now? To see how the radical center might be
          > > electrified - and that's where the votes are, let's not forget - please also
          > > read my article from Op Ed News and GroundSwell a year ago: Creating a
          > > Geonomic Political Party in New York State
          > >
          > >
          > > http://www.opednews.com/articles/Creating-a-Geonomic-Politi-by-Scott-Baker-091208-229.html
          > >
          > >
          > > Please let me know your opinions, suggestions and yes, criticisms, of this
          > > ambitious but oh-so-needed reform party.
          > >
          > >
          > > Scott Baker - Op Ed News Journalist/Senior Editor<http://www.opednews.com/author/author24983.html>;
          > > Author; President: Common Ground - NYC <http://commongroundnyc.org/>
          > > <http://commongroundnyc.org/>
          > > Petitions:
          > > -- Set up a Land Value Tax & untax ALL productive activities to make
          > > California Healthy, Wealthy, and Prosperous
          > >
          > > <http://www.change.org/petitions/view/support_reform_that_will_revitalize_californias_economy_and_end_the_public_finance_crisis>--
          > > Set up a State Bank in California to Terminate the debt
          > > <http://www.change.org/petitions/view/help_the_terminator_save_california>--
          > > Set up a State Bank For Florida<http://www.change.org/petitions/view/let_the_sun_shine_on_a_state_bank_for_florida><http://www.change.org/petitions/view/let_the_sun_shine_on_a_state_bank_for_florida>
          > > -- Complete the East Side Manhattan Greenway from 38-61 Streets and save
          > > bikers, help the environment, and clear up traffic
          > > <http://environment.change.org/petitions/view/close_the_gap_2>-- Tax
          > > Vacant & Unused Land to Return its value to the Community
          > >
          > > <http://www.change.org/petitions/view/tax_vacant_unused_land_to_return_its_value_to_the_community>--
          > > Untax Production and Wages while taxing the use/abuse of natural resources.
          > > Polluters pay while workers and entrepreneurs profit from true production<http://www.change.org/petitions/view/a_new_form_of_capitalism_geonomics>
          > > -- Close New York State's budget Gap with money from its own agencies by
          > > setting up a State Bank<http://www.change.org/petitions/view/let_the_empire_state_finance_its_own_budget_gap>
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          >

        • Scott on the Spot
          I m beginning to believe that caucuses are useful for parties to bury idea they d rather not deal with. The Georgist element has been in both the Democratic
          Message 4 of 27 , Oct 9, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            I'm beginning to believe that caucuses are useful for parties to bury idea they'd rather not deal with. The Georgist element has been in both the Democratic and Republican party for a while, and is unknown outside of diehard Georgists (I never heard of them until Jeff Smith clued me in, and I had heard of a lot of other Georgist movements by then).
            A new party, even a small one, would get more publicity.
            I think Friedman is right: there will be a viable third party candidate in 2012, when Washington is paralyzed, again. It might be Palin from a Tea Party. It might be a Geoist from a party by the same name. We're starting to assemble the planks, or at least gather the nails...

            --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "Jason" <nysa71@...> wrote:
            >
            >
            > Roy Langston: I would be interested in an exchange of ideas on how to
            > work effectively within the existing left-of-center parties.
            >
            >
            > Jason: Well, there's the Democratic Freedom Caucus, which advocates for
            > shifting taxes to LVT and natural resources,
            > www.democraticfreedomcaucus.org <http://www.democraticfreedomcaucus.org>
            >
            > One could also advocate for a geoist club within the Democratic Party,
            > (e.g., the Democratic Geoist Club?)
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston1" <roy_langston1@>
            > wrote:
            > >
            > > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, Scott Baker
            > > ssbaker305@ wrote:
            > >
            > > > Last night, we had our kickoff meeting for Common
            > > > Ground-NYC for FY 2011. We discussed many fine
            > > > ideas and made real progress, but there was one
            > > > that seemed especially ambitious, even to me, and
            > > > that was to create a new Geoist Political Party
            > >
            > > Geoists don't agree on enough to form a viable party.
            > > We must bring the truth to existing parties and show
            > > them why their way can never work, and our way must
            > > necessarily work, in achieving their own (putative)
            > > objectives.
            > >
            > > > Is our time now? To see how the radical center
            > > > might be electrified - and that's where the votes
            > > > are, let's not forget - please also read my article
            > > > from Op Ed News and GroundSwell a year ago:Creating
            > > > a Geonomic Political Party in New York State
            > > >
            > > >
            > http://www.opednews.com/articles/Creating-a-Geonomic-Politi-by-Scott-Bak\
            > er-091208-229.html
            > > >
            > > > Please let me know your opinions, suggestions and
            > > > yes, criticisms, of this ambitious but oh-so-needed
            > > > reform party.
            > >
            > > You seem to miss the fact that a geoist party would in
            > > fact be a one-issue party, like the Marijuana Party.
            > > It's the biggest issue, and dominates almost all the
            > > other issues, but it is still just one issue. It is
            > > not possible to build a viable party around one issue.
            > >
            > > IMO we should just recognize that in capitalist
            > > countries we are more egalitarian than -- to the left
            > > of -- the mainstream, and just work within the largest
            > > party on the left. Yes, it is like hitting your head
            > > against a stone wall, as Sue observed. But IMO, if you
            > > are going to be political, there is no more productive
            > > use of your energies than to join the mainstream party
            > > that is closest to your views on other issues, and
            > > take every opportunity to educate them about land.
            > >
            > > I would be interested in an exchange of ideas on how
            > > to work effectively within the existing left-of-center
            > > parties.
            > >
            > > -- Roy Langston
            > >
            >
          • John
            ... In the UK, well LVT is gaining some ground, not full Geoism, in penetrating political parties. The Labour Land Campaign and the Lib Dem Alter Group. The
            Message 5 of 27 , Oct 9, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston1" <roy_langston1@...> wrote:

              > Geoists don't agree on enough to form a viable party.
              > We must bring the truth to existing parties and show
              > them why their way can never work, and our way must
              > necessarily work, in achieving their own (putative)
              > objectives.

              In the UK, well LVT is gaining some ground, not full Geoism, in penetrating political parties.   The Labour Land Campaign and the Lib Dem Alter Group.  The Green Party would implement LVT.  The German Greens ruled Germany, so a party with a wide following.

              Many top Lib Dems, inc' the UK deputy Prime Minister, support LVT. Recent Labour Party leader candidate, Andy Burnham, advocated LVT.

              How deep is Geoism, or LVT penetrating the Republicans and Democrats in the USA on a national level?

              Because of the State system in the USA, LVT was implemented in many cities, which never occurred in the UK.


            • John
              ... The great thing about LVT, and to full Geoism to an extent, is that it fits into other political systems easily. Business behavior is not changed. The
              Message 6 of 27 , Oct 9, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston1" <roy_langston1@...> wrote:
                > You seem to miss the fact that a geoist party would in
                > fact be a one-issue party, like the Marijuana Party.
                > It's the biggest issue, and dominates almost all the
                > other issues, but it is still just one issue. It is
                > not possible to build a viable party around one issue.

                The great thing about LVT, and to full Geoism to an extent, is that it fits into other political systems easily.  

                Business behavior is not changed.

                The problem is that many think LVT is just another tax. Taxes come and go - except the temporary tax to fund the Napoleonic wars, income tax. LVT is not just another tax.  Maybe it should be called the Geoist Charge, or Geoist Reclaim Charge (it reclaims community created values), or something with Geoist in it. 

                Thatcher called the disastrous Poll Tax, the "Community Charge". to sanitize it.  

                LVT must be eventually be embedded into the psyche of the people, and parties, as votes for women is.  No one would ever attempt to reverse the laws on voting.  This is across parties.

                Presentation is all.
              • Scott on the Spot
                Gaffney suggests calling them resource fees instead of Land Value Taxes. Sounds good to me. The Green party in Ontario has a Georgist plank. I ve heard of
                Message 7 of 27 , Oct 10, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  Gaffney suggests calling them resource fees instead of Land Value Taxes. Sounds good to me.
                  The Green party in Ontario has a Georgist plank. I've heard of it, read it, and met some people involved in the party who believe it. That is far better than any dem/repub here who has never mentioned anyhting even remotely like LVT/Ground Rent/Resource Fees, except in some abstract way as in "polluters should pay for their pollution." maybe Bernie Sanders comes closest to that, but he's independent/Socialist.

                  --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "John" <burns-john@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston1" <roy_langston1@>
                  > wrote:
                  > > You seem to miss the fact that a geoist party would in
                  > > fact be a one-issue party, like the Marijuana Party.
                  > > It's the biggest issue, and dominates almost all the
                  > > other issues, but it is still just one issue. It is
                  > > not possible to build a viable party around one issue.
                  > The great thing about LVT, and to full Geoism to an extent, is that it
                  > fits into other political systems easily.
                  > Business behavior is not changed.
                  > The problem is that many think LVT is just another tax. Taxes come and
                  > go - except the temporary tax to fund the Napoleonic wars, income tax.
                  > LVT is not just another tax. Maybe it should be called the Geoist
                  > Charge, or Geoist Reclaim Charge (it reclaims community created values),
                  > or something with Geoist in it.
                  > Thatcher called the disastrous Poll Tax, the "Community Charge". to
                  > sanitize it.
                  > LVT must be eventually be embedded into the psyche of the people, and
                  > parties, as votes for women is. No one would ever attempt to reverse
                  > the laws on voting. This is across parties.
                  > Presentation is all.
                  >
                • Jason
                  Scott on the Spot:Gaffney suggests calling them resource fees instead of Land Value Taxes. Sounds good to me. The Green party in Ontario has a Georgist plank.
                  Message 8 of 27 , Oct 10, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment

                    Scott on the Spot:Gaffney suggests calling them resource fees instead of Land Value Taxes. Sounds good to me.
                    The Green party in Ontario has a Georgist plank. I've heard of it, read it, and
                    met some people involved in the party who believe it. That is far better than
                    any dem/repub here who has never mentioned anyhting even remotely like
                    LVT/Ground Rent/Resource Fees, except in some abstract way as in "polluters
                    should pay for their pollution." maybe Bernie Sanders comes closest to that,
                    but he's independent/Socialist.

                    Jason: I've heard that congressman Dennis Kucinich is a Georgist/Geoist...or at least sympathetic to that view. Any truth to that? 


                  • roy_langston1
                    ... A land value tax is one specific mechanism to recover the publicly created rent of a natural resource. It applies only to locations, only when they are
                    Message 9 of 27 , Oct 11, 2010
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "Scott on the Spot"
                      <ssbaker305@...> wrote:

                      > Gaffney suggests calling them resource fees instead
                      > of Land Value Taxes. Sounds good to me.

                      A land value tax is one specific mechanism to recover
                      the publicly created rent of a natural resource. It
                      applies only to locations, only when they are formally
                      privately owned, only when they are subject to property
                      taxation, and only when they have a capitalized exchange
                      value. I have suggested the term "land rent recovery"
                      as a more general term for recovering the publicly
                      created rent of locations for public purposes and
                      benefit by whatever mechanism might apply, but maybe we
                      should consider using a broader term that covers all
                      natural resources, like "resource rent recovery."

                      Time to learn the three Rs: Recover Resource Rents!

                      -- Roy Langston
                    • John
                      ... Resource fees? Land Rent Recovery? The term has to be meaningful to the average person. Those are not. Mr Average will go uh! when looking at those.
                      Message 10 of 27 , Oct 11, 2010
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston1" <roy_langston1@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "Scott on the Spot"
                        > ssbaker305@ wrote:

                        > > Gaffney suggests calling them resource fees instead
                        > > of Land Value Taxes. Sounds good to me.

                        > A land value tax is one specific mechanism to recover
                        > the publicly created rent of a natural resource. It
                        > applies only to locations, only when they are formally
                        > privately owned, only when they are subject to property
                        > taxation, and only when they have a capitalized exchange
                        > value. I have suggested the term "land rent recovery"
                        > as a more general term for recovering the publicly
                        > created rent of locations for public purposes and
                        > benefit by whatever mechanism might apply, but maybe we
                        > should consider using a broader term that covers all
                        > natural resources, like "resource rent recovery."

                        > Time to learn the three Rs: Recover Resource Rents!

                        Resource fees? Land Rent Recovery? The term has to be meaningful to the average person. Those are not.  Mr Average will go "uh!" when looking at those. :)

                        "Community Value Recovery Fees" or "Community Value Reclaim Fees" to me is self explanatory.  Maybe shortened to "Community Value ReclaimOne thing is clear, it must not have the word TAX in it.

                        People must understand that the fee or charge is reclaiming the value that the community created, through public and private spending.  They must be made fully aware that the value of the land was not created by them alone - most think it was. 

                        They must also be made aware that they are NOT being taxed, as in full Geoism, income tax is abolished. And that that the property of the rich is not being taken from them. Most people vote the way they would like to be, rich, but most do not have the intelligence to realize they never will be, so always put themselves at a disadvantage.

                        John
                      • roy_langston1
                        ... I don t know that any of those are any clearer. How about, Public Value Repayment ? ... Yet then you are open to the charge that you are trying to hide
                        Message 11 of 27 , Oct 11, 2010
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "John" <burns-john@...>
                          wrote:

                          > Resource fees? Land Rent Recovery? The term has to be
                          > meaningful to the average person. Those are not. Mr
                          > Average will go "uh!" when looking at those. [:)]
                          > "Community Value Recovery Fees" or "Community Value
                          > Reclaim Fees" to me is self explanatory. Maybe
                          > shortened to "Community Value Reclaim"

                          I don't know that any of those are any clearer.

                          How about, "Public Value Repayment"?

                          > One thing is clear, it must not have the word TAX
                          > in it.

                          Yet then you are open to the charge that you are trying
                          to hide its nature. You can't win.

                          > People must understand that the fee or charge is
                          > reclaiming the value that the community created,
                          > through public and private spending.

                          And people's ordinary activities. Right.

                          > They must be made fully aware that the value of the
                          > land was not created by them alone - most think it was.

                          I doubt they think about it at all. I know I didn't
                          before I encountered geoist thinking.

                          > They must also be made aware that they are NOT being
                          > taxed, as in full Geoism, income tax is abolished.

                          Income tax is not the only tax, although many people
                          talk as though it were. IMO it is dangerous to say
                          land rent recovery isn't a tax, as people may
                          perceive that as dishonest.

                          > And that the property of the rich is not being taken
                          > from them.

                          Depends what you call their, "property."

                          -- Roy Langston
                        • John
                          ... I would say they are. ... I like it. ... That is a risk. Thatcher called the Poll Tax the Community Charge . Is essence she was right. The idea was to
                          Message 12 of 27 , Oct 11, 2010
                          • 0 Attachment

                            --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston1" <roy_langston1@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "John" burns-john@
                            > wrote:
                            >
                            > > Resource fees? Land Rent Recovery? The term has to be
                            > > meaningful to the average person. Those are not. Mr
                            > > Average will go "uh!" when looking at those. [:)]
                            > > "Community Value Recovery Fees" or "Community Value
                            > > Reclaim Fees" to me is self explanatory. Maybe
                            > > shortened to "Community Value Reclaim"
                            >
                            > I don't know that any of those are any clearer.

                            I would say they are.
                             
                            > How about, "Public Value Repayment"?

                            I like it.
                             
                            > > One thing is clear, it must not have the word TAX
                            > > in it.
                            >
                            > Yet then you are open to the charge that you are trying
                            > to hide its nature. You can't win.

                            That is a risk.  Thatcher called the Poll Tax the "Community Charge".  Is essence she was right.  The idea was to pay for the local services you receive, hence the word charge.
                             
                            > > People must understand that the fee or charge is
                            > > reclaiming the value that the community created,
                            > > through public and private spending.
                            >
                            > And people's ordinary activities. Right.
                            >
                            > > They must be made fully aware that the value of the
                            > > land was not created by them alone - most think it was.
                            >
                            > I doubt they think about it at all. I know I didn't
                            > before I encountered geoist thinking.

                            Tell them that the value in the land is not theirs, and belongs to the community. See what the response is.
                             
                            > > They must also be made aware that they are NOT being
                            > > taxed, as in full Geoism, income tax is abolished.
                            >
                            > Income tax is not the only tax, although many people
                            > talk as though it were. IMO it is dangerous to say
                            > land rent recovery isn't a tax, as people may
                            > perceive that as dishonest.

                            It isn't a tax.  It is reclamation.
                             
                            > > And that the property of the rich is not being taken
                            > > from them.
                            >
                            > Depends what you call their, "property."

                            They can still own land.  No one takes it from them.  Many think it is taking something - usually the value of their land - so perceive it as being Communist or whatever, but rarely as it is.

                          • Jason
                            Since LVT incentivizes the most productive use of land with the least amount of land, (and therefore, the conservation of land), and since going green is
                            Message 13 of 27 , Oct 11, 2010
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Since LVT incentivizes the most productive use of land with the least
                              amount of land, (and therefore, the conservation of land), and since
                              "going green" is "in" right now, maybe you could also call it something
                              like the "Land Ineffciency Tax". At the very least, calling it that
                              might sound appealing to those who are more passionate about
                              conservation, since LVT would effectively function as a tax on the
                              ineffcient use of land, (with land speculation being the most
                              inefficient use of land of all).

                              ---Jason


                              --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston1" <roy_langston1@...>
                              wrote:
                              >
                              > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "John" burns-john@
                              > wrote:
                              >
                              > > Resource fees? Land Rent Recovery? The term has to be
                              > > meaningful to the average person. Those are not. Mr
                              > > Average will go "uh!" when looking at those. [:)]
                              > > "Community Value Recovery Fees" or "Community Value
                              > > Reclaim Fees" to me is self explanatory. Maybe
                              > > shortened to "Community Value Reclaim"
                              >
                              > I don't know that any of those are any clearer.
                              >
                              > How about, "Public Value Repayment"?
                              >
                              > > One thing is clear, it must not have the word TAX
                              > > in it.
                              >
                              > Yet then you are open to the charge that you are trying
                              > to hide its nature. You can't win.
                              >
                              > > People must understand that the fee or charge is
                              > > reclaiming the value that the community created,
                              > > through public and private spending.
                              >
                              > And people's ordinary activities. Right.
                              >
                              > > They must be made fully aware that the value of the
                              > > land was not created by them alone - most think it was.
                              >
                              > I doubt they think about it at all. I know I didn't
                              > before I encountered geoist thinking.
                              >
                              > > They must also be made aware that they are NOT being
                              > > taxed, as in full Geoism, income tax is abolished.
                              >
                              > Income tax is not the only tax, although many people
                              > talk as though it were. IMO it is dangerous to say
                              > land rent recovery isn't a tax, as people may
                              > perceive that as dishonest.
                              >
                              > > And that the property of the rich is not being taken
                              > > from them.
                              >
                              > Depends what you call their, "property."
                              >
                              > -- Roy Langston
                              >
                            • David Reed
                              Hooray! Somebody else has hit on the repayment principle. Suggested Social values repayment in 2001 see Ed Dodson s biographical guide to the UK on
                              Message 14 of 27 , Oct 12, 2010
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Hooray! Somebody else has hit on the repayment principle. Suggested" Social values repayment" in 2001 see Ed Dodson's biographical guide to the UK on Co-operative Individualism site.Suggested "land value repayment" to Labour Land Campaign ten years earlier than that.
                                 
                                Once you are talking in "repayment" terms, people ask what they have received that they have to pay back which gives an opportunity for a full Georgist explanation.It also leaves Income Tax open to a repayment analysis, which is hard for its proponents to muster. I was given such a justification (for Income Tax) at school and it did n't add up then! Once taxes are judged to see which contain an element of repayment for advantages gained or appropriated so a lot of taxes appear like mere appropriations.
                                 
                                At the time it appeared that LV(T)R might be a way to stop Keynesian demand stimulus money disappearing out of the production-consumption loop and being hedged into real estate.This analysis has subsequently been borne out by events (negatively).The Georgist levy is too  important and different to be dismissed as "another tax." It is n't a tax,it's a repayment of sums which people have n't earned and which it would be wrong for them to hang onto.  
                                 

                                To: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com
                                From: nysa71@...
                                Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 23:49:36 +0000
                                Subject: [LandCafe] Re: Time for a new Political Party - a Georgist/Geoist Party?

                                 

                                Since LVT incentivizes the most productive use of land with the least
                                amount of land, (and therefore, the conservation of land), and since
                                "going green" is "in" right now, maybe you could also call it something
                                like the "Land Ineffciency Tax". At the very least, calling it that
                                might sound appealing to those who are more passionate about
                                conservation, since LVT would effectively function as a tax on the
                                ineffcient use of land, (with land speculation being the most
                                inefficient use of land of all).

                                ---Jason

                                --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston1" <roy_langston1@...>
                                wrote:
                                >
                                > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "John" burns-john@
                                > wrote:
                                >
                                > > Resource fees? Land Rent Recovery? The term has to be
                                > > meaningful to the average person. Those are not. Mr
                                > > Average will go "uh!" when looking at those. [:)]
                                > > "Community Value Recovery Fees" or "Community Value
                                > > Reclaim Fees" to me is self explanatory. Maybe
                                > > shortened to "Community Value Reclaim"
                                >
                                > I don't know that any of those are any clearer.
                                >
                                > How about, "Public Value Repayment"?
                                >
                                > > One thing is clear, it must not have the word TAX
                                > > in it.
                                >
                                > Yet then you are open to the charge that you are trying
                                > to hide its nature. You can't win.
                                >
                                > > People must understand that the fee or charge is
                                > > reclaiming the value that the community created,
                                > > through public and private spending.
                                >
                                > And people's ordinary activities. Right.
                                >
                                > > They must be made fully aware that the value of the
                                > > land was not created by them alone - most think it was.
                                >
                                > I doubt they think about it at all. I know I didn't
                                > before I encountered geoist thinking.
                                >
                                > > They must also be made aware that they are NOT being
                                > > taxed, as in full Geoism, income tax is abolished.
                                >
                                > Income tax is not the only tax, although many people
                                > talk as though it were. IMO it is dangerous to say
                                > land rent recovery isn't a tax, as people may
                                > perceive that as dishonest.
                                >
                                > > And that the property of the rich is not being taken
                                > > from them.
                                >
                                > Depends what you call their, "property."
                                >
                                > -- Roy Langston
                                >


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