Housing

File: marxandfriedmanonthesamepage.jpg (61KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 640x480px

> Georgist tax policy reconciles equity and efficiency. Taxing land is progressive because the ownership of land is so highly concentrated among the most wealthy,'8 and because the tax may not be shifted. It is efficient because it is neutral among rival land-use options: the tax is fixed, regardless of land use. This is one favourable point on which many modern economists actually agree, although they keep struggling against it
> Georgist tax policy contains urban sprawl, and its heavy associated costs, without overriding market decisions or consumer preferences, simply by making the market work better. land values are the product of demand for location; they are marked by continuity in space. That shows quite simply that people demand compact settlement and centrality. A well-oiled land market will give it to them.

File: game-design-3-638.jpg (66KB, 638x479px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 638x479px

> Georgist tax policy creates jobs without inflation, and without deficits. "Fiscal stimulus," in the shallow modern usage, is a euphemism for running deficits, often with funny money. George's proposed land tax might be called, rather, "true fiscal stimulus". It stimulates demand for labor by promoting employment; it precludes inflation as the labor produces goods to match the new demand. It precludes deficits because it raises revenue. That is its peculiar reconciliatory genius: it stimulates private work and investment in the very process of raising revenue. It is the only tax of any serious revenue potential that does not bear down on and suppress production and exchange. As I have noted, George's fiscal policy takes two problems and composes them into one solution.

> George's land tax lets a polity attract people and capital en masse, without diluting its resource base. This is by virtue of synergy, the ultimate rationale for Chamber-of-Commerce boosterism. Urban economists like William Alonso have illustrated the power of such synergy by showing that bigger cities have more land value per head than smaller ones. (Land value is the resource base of a city.) Urbanists like Jane Jacobs and Holly Whyte have written on the intimate details of how this works on the streets. Julian Simon (The Ultimate Resource) philosophizes on the power of creative thought generated when people associate freely and closely in large numbers. Henry George made the same points in 1879

>Georgist policies encourage the conservation of ecology and environment while also making jobs, by abating sprawl. It is a matter of focusing human activity on the good lands, thus meeting demands there and relieving the pressure to invade lands that are now wild and marginal for human needs. Sprawl in the urban environment is the kind most publicized, but there is analogous sprawl in agriculture, forestry, mining, recreation and other land uses and industries.

File: adamsmithisageoist.jpg (67KB, 960x480px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 960x480px

>Georgist policies strengthen public revenues while in the same process promoting economy in government. Anti-governmentalists often identify any tax policy with public extravagance. Georgist tax policy, on the contrary, saves public funds in many ways. By facilitating the creation of jobs it lowers welfare costs, unemployment compensation, doles, aid to families with dependent children and all that. It lowers jail and police costs, and all the enormous private expenditures, precautions, and deprivations now taken to guard against theft and other crime. Idle hands are not just wasted, they steal and destroy

>>133049174
georgism seems entirely focused on the urban environment, and will leave rural environments pointless to be purchased, since the less developed regions are not worth the tax hike it takes to take care of them.

File: willy.jpg (45KB, 500x336px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 500x336px

>>133049714
No, it would help farmers. In the first place, the LVT would fall primarily on urban land, not rural land, since land values are concentrated primarily in urban areas. In the second place, the increased cost of paying a higher tax on land value would be more than offset by (1) the savings incurred from paying lower taxes on everything else, (2) the reversal of urban sprawl (and thus of the inflationary pressure that sprawl currently imposes on the value of farmland), and the increase in income that would result from both a higher margin of production and a surge in overall economic activity.

>>133049714
People should move to cities anyway and we should be doing urban vertical farming.

>>133050889
But what about lumber industry? To buy a plot of forrest for harvesting is pointless, if it will cost just as much as an entire block in mid-city.

>>133051193
That is idiotically ineffective and damaging to human psyche.

>>133051216
plots of forest in the middle of nowhere are orders of magnitude less valuable than urban land

would also encourage conservation and more efficient logging/farming practice

>>133051425
But how can this be accounted, when the primary selling point of the tax was that it would reduce urban sprawl? If the landtax outside of the city is reduced, the urban sprawl will be redoubled, even increased as its simply fleeing from the single tax that exists in the society.

>>133051293
> Moving to cities is damaging to the human psyche
kek, you're telling me that the majority of humanity is worse off living in cities? Cities are literally the engines of cultural, technological, scientific, etc. growth and progress, where shit happens, people make more money, are surrounded by more culture, etc.

>>133051634
Simply take a look at jews to see how damaging to the human psyche constant and focused living in urban environment is.

>>133051721
Jews have only been living in urban environments primarily since the mid-late 19th century. Literally the same as white people for the most part.

>>133051630
The primary point of the tax is it enables us to lower taxes on labor without raising taxes on capital without reducing public revenues.

containing sprawl is just one of the side effects

>>133051915
This really challenged my preconcieved notions there, Chaim.

>>133052090
Yet it leaves huge holes in consuming, and will do nothing to guide the population in more healthy habits. No taxes on tobacco, alcohol, gasoline, narcotics, just land. It will encourage nothing but materialism.

>>133052278
These taxes could be negotiated by the consent of people through government. The main point here is to shift the neoliberal paradigm to a georgist one

>>133052453
Seems pointless. And since i dont agree with agenda 21, i dont find the newly formed incentives worth it. Big cities do not deserve a bonus revenue off of rural areas.

>>133052595
its the opposite though... big rich urban environments would be footing most of the tax burden as they have the most valuable land

File: W H I T E P E O P L E.webm (2MB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 640x480px

>>133051915
>Literally the same as white people for the most part.
yeah and you guys are doing so great

>>133053004
Go back to fucking a goat and committing honor killings, Hamza

>>133051634
If you aren't willing to admit cities with noise and lights and action are damaging to human psych then you have to be a troll or a shill

>>133049174
I skimmed that. There's no information on what Georgeism actually is. Just a bunch of platitudes about what it accomplishes or how great it is

>>133051915
jew quarters have been a thing for a thousand years. Jews could not have survived in the countryside in Europe due to their non citizen and persona non grata status as Christkilers. In East Europe and Russia they had jewish peasantry because the Jews backed the Boyars and royals who allowed them to stay as a loyal support system.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (27KB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 1440x1080px

>>133053485
I wonder who is behind this post

>>133053794
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism