With the growth of population, land grows in value, and the men who work it must pay more for the privilege.

>>513412424 (OP)
The true king of libertarian economics

>>513412687
Me?!

>>513412424 (OP)
What determines land value here

>>513415699
checked and answered

>>513417622
So the answer is price controls? Just gimmie the damn QRD already

>>513418103
The value of land is determined by the work put into the land by the community around it. When you put work into your own town, and you start getting railroads and factories, and higher paying jobs, the value of the land itself rises. With this brings poverty, because the men who tend the land are priced out. More of the wage goes towards rent. This is a good thing for some people, and a bad thing for others.

>>513418103
The guy in the picture, Henry George, argues for a single land tax. One singular tax that's placed on land, depending on how economically valuable that land is. That is an objective measure that can be taxed.

>>513418487
So a progressive tax on land value? Paid presumably at time of sale?

>>513412424 (OP)
The perfect ideology for the tech overlords to bring about a new glorious fuedal age. They pay people to promote it OP your should reach out to get some Thiel bucks.

>>513418974
>>513419232
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism

>>513418974
If by progressive you mean graduated, it doesn't have to be. It could be a flat rate based on the land value. And it would be paid annually, not at time of sale.

>>513419455
Can you see the cat?

>>513419507
TIL, never knew this phrase. But I don't really "believe" in Georgism in the sense I think a single tax would work or be desirable. But I definitely do support an LVT.

>>513419617
I don't "believe in Georgism" in the sense you mean either. I was just doing my research for the day, learned a little bit more about Mr. George, and decided to make a post to see how bad pol was today.

>>513419232
Georgism is anti-feudal because it punishes unproductive landowners holding land

>>513412424 (OP)
Land ownership should be a right of citizens like in the ancient times.
There should be untaxed minimum like average house and a yard size. Owning more than 500x of this should be ilegal.

>>513419775
In my own personal experience, US veterans have this. VA loans are awesome. A lot of my opinion on current policy is persuaded by how the Roman citizen system worked.

>>513419410
Your retarded this ideology only made any small level of sense for a small amount of time after the trans continental railroad got built and the west wasn't fully settled. The only reason why its making a comeback now is because silicon valley is paying people to promote it.

>>513419771
No it logically ends up with only rich capital owners owning all the land. And a caste of peasants making thay land "productive"

>>513419913
>your
brother

>>513419971
Such a good comeback little bro

>>513419962
Lol you're retarded.

Take now ... some hard-headed business man, who has no theories, but knows how to make money. Say to him: "Here is a little village; in ten years it will be a great city—in ten years the railroad will have taken the place of the stage coach, the electric light of the candle; it will abound with all the machinery and improvements that so enormously multiply the effective power of labor. Will in ten years, interest be any higher?"

He will tell you, "No!"

"Will the wages of common labor be any higher; will it be easier for a man who has nothing but his labor to make an independent living?"

He will tell you, "No; the wages of common labor will not be any higher; on the contrary, all the chances are that they will be lower; it will not be easier for the mere laborer to make an independent living; the chances are that it will be harder."

"What, then, will be higher?"

"Rent, the value of land. Go, get yourself a piece of ground, and hold possession."

And if, under such circumstances, you take his advice, you need do nothing more. You may sit down and smoke your pipe; you may lie around like the lazzaroni of Naples or the leperos of Mexico; you may go up in a balloon or down a hole in the ground; and without doing one stroke of work, without adding one iota of wealth to the community, in ten years you will be rich! In the new city you may have a luxurious mansion, but among its public buildings will be an almshouse.

>>513419455
What make this different from the current property tax system

>>513420070
Income tax, sales tax, living tax becomes 0

>>513419962
How does this logically happen? Land ownership is more expensive under this system.

>>513412424 (OP)
How about I pay no tax instead

>>513420145
we used to hang people for saying things like that

>>513420142
Your a dumbass

>land ownership will be more expensive
>this means poor people will all own the land not the rich people

>>513420493
Look, this is an intellectual discussion. The kind of discussion that requires reading things. You're obviously illiterate. Your opinion means nothing.

>>513420117
So the full brunt of taxation falls on land owners, based on periodic tax appraisals, presumably. But this seems like it would encourage rent-seeking behavior

>>513420550
Tell me how im wrong

>>513420584
The more the inhabitant was obliged to pay for the tax, the less he would incline to pay for the ground

>>513412424 (OP)
Real estate (((investors))) push hard for mass immigration because it makes them richer.

>>513420674
That seems to put something of an upper bound on growth

>>513419879
If you study rome you will see that rich are the root of all evil. I was pretty libertarian untill I saw how rich poeple were consistently traitors that favored foreighn slaves like this:

Plutarch, The Parallel Lives
The Life of Tiberius Gracchus

Of the territory which the Romans won in war from their neighbours, a part they sold, and a part they made common land, and assigned it for occupation to the poor and indigent among the citizens, on payment of a small rent into the public treasury. And when the rich began to offer larger rents and drove out the poor, a law was enacted forbidding the holding by one person of more than five hundred acres of land. For a short time this enactment gave a check to the rapacity of the rich, and was of assistance to the poor, who remained in their places on the land which they had rented and occupied the allotment which each had held from the outset. But later on the neighbouring rich men, by means of fictitious personages, transferred these rentals to themselves, and finally held most of the land openly in their own names. Then the poor, who had been ejected from their land, no longer showed themselves eager for military service, and neglected the bringing up of children, so that soon all Italy was conscious of a dearth of freemen, and was filled with gangs of foreign slaves, by whose aid the rich cultivated their estates, from which they had driven away the free citizens. An attempt was therefore made to rectify this evil, and by Caius Laelius the comrade of Scipio; but the men of influence opposed his measures

>>513421055
I try to study closely the collapse of Rome (and others), to see what similarities pop up in modern times. Hard to keep track of the names. Thanks.

>>513420973
From my understanding, I don't think so. The idea is to tax the land based on it's economic value; this is a thing that changes and can be calculated. We all know that for some reason, land in NYC is more valuable than a patch of grass in Montana. But that land also has a much MUCH higher economic output, and should theoretically be taxed much higher. It's not a one time tax. The stock market goes up forever, kind of.

>>513420668
The 100% LVT removes the financial incentive to own more land than you're actively using, i.e. speculate. You can't gamble with an asset that charges you 100% of your expected speculative profit every year. It would be like if you bought gold as a speculative (gambling) asset but had to pay a tax that was equivalent to 100% of the increase in the value of that gold every year. If your gold appreciates in a year $126 over what you bought it for, but then you have to pay $126 to the government in tax, and do the same thing next year, and the year after that, when would you profit off that gold? The answer is "never." So you wouldn't buy the gold, would you? That's how LVT works. The LVT is about precisely eliminating speculation on land ownership, there is no intent to change how people own land otherwise.

Georgism isn't even about eliminating landlords or large landowners, who George expected would still exist. You'd still have ranchers that own a gorillion acres and landlords that provide quality rental housing (usually handymen who graduate to owning one building). It's about eliminating gambling that uses land as a chip.

Now that's a very fair and straightforward explanation of the goal and the mechanism used to obtain it. Let's see how maturely you can respond.

>>513421552
"Speculation" is the key idea. That's the word that got me down this rabbithole. Good take.

>>513420493
Yes because its easier for 100 people to make 100 parcels of land profitable than it is for 1 person

>>513412424 (OP)
It was good that Henry George popularized Land Tax and informed the broader public.

The idea that landlords are rent-seeking parasites was well known for hundreds of years. The founding fathers of the USA all understood this reality. It is only (((contemporary economics))) that deliberately hides this truth.
Adam Smith, the "father" of modern economics specifically calls out and disparages rent-seeking landlords. (Pic related)

The most up to date truthful economist is Michael Hudson. His only blindspot is not acknowledging jews are disproportionately involved in rent-seeking and usury.

A nation would benefit tremendously from capturing all rent-seeking ill-gotten gains (like via land tax) to fund government and dispersing the remained via a Citizens Dividend (like Thomas Paine proposed). Land, mineral rights, radio spectrum (like cellphones use), air traffic, ports (this is part of why tariffs are good), copyrights, patents, and any other natural or government granted "monopoly right" should have rents extracted and bestowed to the citizens.

imagine if henry george was a modern clown girl

>>513422905
God, imagine if they took landlord profits and turned them into roads and powerplants

>>513421552
My only point is that this is the perfect ideology for neo feudlism and its being actively pushed by people who want neo feudalism. If you're cool with that, that's great.

There is one huge flaw in this ideology though. there hasn't been any meaningful land speculation industry in a century. If its all based on the speculative value of land, you dont understand how the American economy works. This will only make land more expensive and it will be centralized in the hands of a few wealthy people. Everyone else will get the opportunity to make the land productive for them.

>>513420070
>>513420117
Also, it's purely a land tax. Current property tax is on both land and structures, which in effect is mostly a tax on structures because they are usually worth more than the land.

>>513421731
No one person its easier for one person who has money to hire 100 people to make the land profitable for him

Anon has a minimal genetical difference with me

I must excuse his kid fucking

>>513423223
economic rent of land, legal privileges, and natural monopolies should accrue to the community, rather than private owners. We're all arguing the same thing. What do you think a tax is?

>>513423041
To even have a chance of having a tax base that resembles what we have today in the United states they arbitrarily have to morenthan double what the land in the united states is worth today

Landlords wouldn't be paying for the infrastructure they would barely be able to cover the cost of the military if this system was implemented

>>513423500
If Donald Trump becomes President, the entire world will erupt into World War 3.

>>513423453
I dont think you've seriously looked at the economics of this. If you think the taxes would actually be able to benefit the average person. It would cause massive austerity measures in the US.

>>513412424 (OP)
But why

>>513423621
Adam Smith disagrees with you.

>>513423621
I've looked into what people smarter than both you and I have said about this. I agree with the idea. The flaws you're trying to point out are giant "what-if" poor attempts at dialectic. I don't respect your intelligence because of your previous mishaps with the word "Your". I don't think you're arguing in good faith. This website has a lot of mental illness, and it's hard to tell the difference between the intellectuals and the retards sometimes. I was doing a little bit of research on something barely adjacent to the topic of Georgism, got stuck in a rabbithole about the word "Speculation", and made a post here out of boredom. You seemed to have been the schizo-retard type on first impression, and that's very important.

>>513423788
I dont think you understand what austerity means. Also this system doesn't abolish Landlords. Landlords also still pay taxes today in the real world.

Im on boat though landlords are parasites and they should be abolished. This system would definitely not accomplish that though. Why do all the neo-feudalists love it so much??

>>513423861
My whole point is its being pushed by silicon valley, specifically those who advocate for neo-feudalism. You are literally saying my point back to me

>>513424051
That's a conspiracy theory.

>>513415699
in local governments today, tax appraisers generally apply the rule of 'best and highest use' or something like that. so if you are sitting on prime farm land but doing nothing with it, the value will probably be based off of it being farmland rather than just unused wetlands or whatever

one time i saw a guy appeal a local case to the county council. the land he owned was on a road that had become all industrial over 5-10 years, because of proximity to insterstates and a local port. warehousing, some manufacturing, etc. his land had been in his family for a lot of years and now suddenly, it was appraised as an industrial property worth a fuckload of money -- because honestly the dude could have sold it and become and instant multi-millionaire and there were many willing buyers. im not even sure if it was zoned industrial, but everything else around him was

so he had this annual tax bill that was like 50k or something insane, and he's just a middle class guy that happened to have some inherited land that his family held for decades and decades that was now super valuable. the county council actually found in his favor on this, but he really was a their mercy because the valuation method was valid under state law

>>513424171
Thank you for that.

>>513423987
You think Adam Smith is a "neo-feudalsit". Your are a retard, disinfo agent, bot, or all three.

>>513424365
I don't think any of the people I've looked into about this were even alive after like 1950

>>513424365
I'm pretty sure this dumpster fire of a website deliberately mangles the spelling of posts they don't like.

It is kind of amazing there are still occasionally non-garbage threads here at all.

>>513424430
Michael Hudson is still alive, but very old ,sadly.

>>513424734
I just come up with thread ideas when I'm taking a shower or something. I make my own threads, I choose what I view here.

>>513425030
I don't give much value to modern thinkers. I like to read the thoughts of people who witnessed big events in their life and how they composed their findings. I don't care about anything after maybe the 70's or 80's. Too much obfuscation.

>>513424365
Little Bro georgism was founded way after Adam Smith was born. He was a capitalist. He would not agree with georgism. Im happy you have a lot of adam smith memes in your lineup though, thats super cool

>>513425038
I glance at the catalog occasionally out of habit. If I'm interested in what other anons think about a subject I search 4plebs. This site is 99% noise to 1% signal, now.

>>513418487
ive sat in on a lot of property tax hearings and zoning disputes, so i know a little about this area but am by no means an expert

but it appears that under this system, if my family owns a home out in BFE but suddenly toyota builds a plant nearby, my land will be re-valued at its 'best and higest use' which would be as an industrial property for parts suppliers to setup shop and send parts to the toyota plant

so now my home that my grandpa built goes from being valued (and taxed) at 250k to suddenly 3 million, and i get forced out of my home by big business because i cant afford to pay the property tax. am i right or will there be some sort of credit or exemption for these types of cases?

>>513425347
I understand your view. In my mind, the way this is meant to work is that community exists. These changes are made for the benefit of the community. A democratic community, who can assemble and discuss taxes. In a real life situation, the idea is that due to the improvements of the land, and the higher economic output, the man in the house should be able to acquire his share with the same amount of work.

>>513425549
>>513425347
This isn't to say, that if two industrial zones sandwich a residential zone, the residential zone should not be absorbed. It's a decision by the COMMUNITY. Not some guy in an office with a rolex.

To bring my idea together, the land profits are collected as taxes (Instead of private owners who keep the money). Because of this, and the relation between TAXES and COMMUNITY, there will be a social force here that I think a lot of people are dismissing. If you take my money, and we choose how it's being used in our community, people are happy. The government intervention of land value tax prevents the private owners from jewing the community.

>>513425220
I mostly read dead authors too. Michael Hudson is a rarity. He is the only modern economist that focuses on the issue of "monopoly rents" like Henry George and other classical economists understood. Michael Hudson also did groundbreaking work on ancient Mesopotamin economics and the origins of money. The (((libertarian))) fairy tale of barter and gold is all wrong. In his books he also gives an inside look at 20th century banking practices from being there, but also not being an (((insider))).
>>513425275
What does Adam Smith think about land-rents and rent-seekers. (See my previous images for the answer)

>>513425965
His name is on my mind now if I ever get interested enough

>>513422905
>His only blindspot is not acknowledging jews are disproportionately involved in rent-seeking and usury.
Yes and No...
He's the ONLY Classical Economist that (learned Cuniform) and has studied:
1. The Nature and history of Money
2. The Ancient world's economies and their Debt cancellation methods, Hammurabi especially.
3. The insidiousness of the Rentier Class, Unearned Income, Economic Rent,and ECONOMIC PARASITES

I highly recommend watching the entire video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SO-qHypWlgE

>>513426504
Here's one of the most cogent and articulate Macro explanations, of the current state of affairs.

>Richard Wolff & Michael Hudson: BRICS must fight rent to break free like 1800s Europe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4r9DVuXJHM

>>513426504
>>513426724
Yeah, Hudson is very inciteful. Too bad he has (((Richard Wolff))) as a jew handler to keep him from (((noticing))) too much and straying into kike infested territory.

>>513425347
There would very likely be special cases around the primary resident of each citizen. I'm pretty sure Henry George answered questions like this. People don't want to see old widowed grandmas forced to sell. Inherited primary residences could be "grandfathered in". To stop "spite houses" from blocking city prosperity there could be economic incentives to selling a primary residence when it would benefit the community (city) greatly. Eminent domain is an unpleasant blunt instrument.

>>513426504
Okay fine, you got me to look. He has suspenders, so I automatically agree with literally everything this guy says. Sign me up.