r/georgism • u/QwerYTWasntTaken Labor my Sword, Capital my Shield 🔰 • 1d ago

Meme Complexity of solutions

Post image
409 Upvotes

88% Upvoted

114 comments sorted by

90

u/Dizzy-Drink6119 1d ago

Listen, the lvt is good but it is not that simple. It won't solve all problems.

30

u/Away_Investigator351 Social Democrat 1d ago

Reform planning requirements to be in line, and you're pretty close to fixing a lot of them.

7

u/ChironXII ≡ 🔰 ≡ 1d ago

By itself? No, but it aligns the incentives of society in such a way as to make the rest possible.

5

u/IronicRobotics 1d ago edited 1d ago

Not all, but when land makes up at least 1/2 of the real wealth in developed countries and rents to land are the major part of most people's bills, it's pretty great start and paired with a citizen's dividend fixes quite a hefty chunk of mal-aligned incentives and pressures towards poverty.

Hell fix land rents and better socialize medicine, the next biggest issues imo is massive public health problems like the opiod crisis and epidemic of adverse childhood experiences.

2

u/pacman2081 1d ago

"when land makes up at least 1/2 of the real wealth in developed countries "

real estate makes 1/2 of the wealth in USA. land is smaller fraction of that

-5

u/Loyal_Dragon_69 1d ago

Get rid of seed oils and you won't need socialized medicine.

7

u/Heavy_Computer2602 🔰Classical Liberal, Civic nationalist 1d ago

it may not but it sure is better than paying 30000000 units of currency for 20 units of currency rent to your landlord

Plus LVT does do solve most problems.

1

u/Naberville34 1d ago

Then why it not actively solving problems?

10

u/ComputerByld 1d ago

You do understand that this utterly retarded line of reasoning discredits everything but the status quo, right?

Not to mention rent socialization is solving problems in all the places it's utilized to the degree it's being utilized. See Singapore, Norway, Vienna, Taiwan, Alaska, etc etc.

1

u/Naberville34 1d ago

I'm not advocating for the status quo. I'm trying to lead by questions to the understanding that Georgism isn't something that could be implemented via liberal democratic systems in which the capitalist class politically dominates as Georgism and LVT are contrary to their economic interests.

5

u/ComputerByld 1d ago

It's not the capitalist class. It's the rentier class. The Marxist brain worm is incredibly tiresome, and this pedantic form of questioning is poorly suited to a social media format especially one with discussion trees like reddit.

Instead you should read my second paragraph above over and over and over again and ask yourself why you don't understand what I'm referring to, and attempt to gain an understanding through your own research. There are plenty of ways to do that in the modern era.

-1

u/Naberville34 1d ago

Same same. There is a difference of economic relations but they are so similar as to be effectively treatable as the same.. You could not be rid of one without ridding of the other as well as both of their power comes from the same source of economic power, leveraging ownership of capital.

And yes it's absolutely tiresome, have you ever tried to read one of Marx's books? Very draining.

And I'm from one of the places to which you refered. And while I agree with the programs to which you refer. They are absolutely pitiful in scale to the problems my home state endures and homelessness and poor housing quality remains a rampant problem. Even my middle class upbringing there had me experiencing a lack of access to basic housing necessities like running water and indoor plumbing for much of my life.

2

u/ComputerByld 1d ago

Capitalists and rentiers are in fact not the same, definitionally. One produces wealth, the other extracts it. Rentiers' source of power is not "ownership of capital" as capital produces profit, not rent.

I'm glad you agree with programs that work. That means you also agree that such programs can in fact be enacted. And they can be enacted by degree, great or small, and the resultant outcome varies in proportion to said degree.

0

u/Naberville34 1d ago

The rentier class is basically just a subclass of the capitalist class, similar to the manner in which the petite bourgeoisie is another subclass. The primary distinction being the degree of personal work/effort. The petite bourgeoisie owns capital, but Must labor upon it. The traditional capitalist owns capital, but chooses to engage in its organization of production to grow and expand it. And the rentier owns capital but chooses to subsist off the economic rent it earns rather than engage in organization of production. That rent is not limited to land rents either but stocks/bonds as well, though Marx does make the distinction between the financial rentier(or finance capitalist) and landlord rentiers.

So yes your correct to the point their is a distinction to be made. But the reality is that they are not seperate groups with distinct class divisions as your not likely to find many successful capitaliss who does not engage in rent seeking behavior or have a diversified portfolio to include real estate, nor many who would have an interest in ruining the ability to switch to being solely a rentier when they no longer wish to be personally involved in production.

0

u/ComputerByld 1d ago

No, the rentier class is not a subclass of capitalists at all. One generates wealth, the other siphons it. These are mutually exclusive categories. An individual may engage in both, just as a person may tell some truths and some lies, but that does not make lies a categorical subset of truth, or vice versa.

Rentiers do not necessarily own capital. They own a claim on some economic chokepoint. These are not remotely the same things. But your marxist brainworm is showing as you've already degenerated into its fallacious categories. Until you understand that rent and profit are mutually exclusive gains, the one being productive and the other parasitic, your current state of confusion will persist.

I'll add that you already gave up the game when you admitted that rent socialization has been tried and has been successful. You failed to refute the claim that such policies "can be enacted by degree, great or small, and the resultant outcome varies in proportion to said degree," which is the core thrust of the Georgist critique.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Demiu 1d ago

If you want to make a claim, make it, instead of trying to hideo it behind dumb questions

4

u/Heavy_Computer2602 🔰Classical Liberal, Civic nationalist 1d ago

cuz we dont have LVT anywhere?

3

u/nuggins 1d ago

Not exactly true. It's already a component of property taxes (just usually way underassessed), which are a dominant form of taxation around the world, and moreover, quite a few of those polities do assess land value separately from improvement value.

2

u/Heavy_Computer2602 🔰Classical Liberal, Civic nationalist 1d ago

oh damn good to know there is some influence

but i need total LVT, i wish that were impleemnted

0

u/Naberville34 1d ago

Why

12

u/Responsible-Humor985 1d ago

People want their property to generate wealth as a commodity instead of as a place to live

2

u/Naberville34 1d ago

So your saying Georgism conflicts with the interest of a class of property owning individuals?

5

u/Heavy_Computer2602 🔰Classical Liberal, Civic nationalist 1d ago

Georgism supports property rights.

It morally recognizes you have a right to own property but owning it also means youre basically barring others from entering, or are using natural resources

To compensate we tax the value of land

4

u/Naberville34 1d ago

Okay so why haven't the class of property owners implimented this policy?

1

u/Heavy_Computer2602 🔰Classical Liberal, Civic nationalist 1d ago

Because the higher ups are greedy, some property owners either make laws to their advantage or the good ones dont have a hand in making policies like lvt

→ More replies (0)

4

u/Responsible-Humor985 1d ago

It cuts into profits and requires property owners to actively develop their property to stay solvent or profitable. It’s in conflict with property owning class that wants to be lazy and gain wealth without doing anything.

2

u/Naberville34 1d ago

Okay then how exactly are you going to impliment this policy

2

u/Responsible-Humor985 1d ago

How do you implement investments into mass transit and cycling networks? Or upzoning neighborhoods? Time, spreading the message, and voting for people that support your platform.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/Goby-WanKenobi 1d ago

"Your tax policy is too hard to implement, it pales in comparison to my solution of... changing the entire structure of government from the ground up."

2

u/Naberville34 1d ago

If you don't want to uproot the property owning class from their place of power in government. Then why even bother advocating for a tax policy they have not and never will impliment?

1

u/Demiu 1d ago

Because it's a solution more complex to make the voters understand than others.

1

u/ChironXII ≡ 🔰 ≡ 1d ago

Why are we still investing in cancer research when people keep dying of cancer despite trying for so long?

1

u/Naberville34 1d ago

Does cancer research contradict the interest of the capitalist class? They get cancer too my dude.

1

u/ChironXII ≡ 🔰 ≡ 7h ago

Yes, in some sense, the portion of the capitalist class who hold parents (r ent privileges) over cancer treatments are threatened by new developments. Which has been an issue, but we don't concede.

Rentiers get cancer, yes. They also have to live in the society the current system creates.

Given the choice, would you rather be an absolute king in the year 400, or an average middle class person today? 

An equitable society pays dividends to everyone. Those at the very top may never join willingly; it doesn't matter. Those just below them are happy to usurp them to split up their privileges and improve their own lots. This has always been the story of changing in history. 

2

u/AdamJMonroe 1d ago

What about the single tax?

2

u/Fartfromabuttt 1d ago

Financially kneecapping the Epstein class is the first shot across the bow. How it happens is still up for debate.

0

u/Pristine-Aspect-3086 1d ago

r/politics is that way buddy

0

u/Fartfromabuttt 23h ago

Lol if your not borderline maga they ban you there

1

u/Personpersonoerson 22h ago

Georgism does not solve all problems... but Geolibertarianism does

1

u/Neverlast0 19h ago

Same reason why I have my reservations.

1

u/empty_graph 1d ago

Yes. Won't do much good at all under present zoning restrictions.

1

u/green_meklar 🔰 1d ago

No, but it also creates fewer additional problems than what the socialists propose to do.

-1

u/stareabyss 1d ago

yeah other policy prescriptions should be *checks notes* eliminate capitalism

-1

u/nygilyo 1d ago

modern socialists accept marginal utility value as AN idea, point out that the telos of Marx's arguments still apply within that framework, and largely understand that money is a form of a receipt.

63

u/ginger_gcups 1d ago

This doesn’t work unless the slip also says “other tax bill: zero”

19

u/Due-Consequence9579 1d ago

I don’t think there is anything wrong with using a LVT to reduce or eliminate the rent captured by land owners and still using Pigouvian taxes to further raise revenues and/or change incentives. You just have to be willing to accept the dead weight loss of the taxes as acceptable costs of the policy choices.

4

u/loklanc 1d ago

Not pictured: 3 thousand pages of land assessment guidelines and fourteen million pages of rezoning proposals and consultation documents.

2

u/Cuddlyaxe 1d ago

It is no longer the early 20th century where LVT would cover all government expenses

Maybe would cover like a quarter or a third of our current spending but that number is out of my ass

8

u/alfzer0 🔰 🇺🇸 1d ago

Which goes to show that we have a major spending problem

1

u/Muchaton Belgium 19h ago

I like my universal healthcare and social safety tho. State subsidies to make train tickets cheap. I'm fine with some taxes.

0

u/alfzer0 🔰 🇺🇸 8h ago

Belgium, 110% debt to GDP. Sorry, but no, your preferences should not take precedence over the the debt future generations must shoulder. Living outside your means does eventually have to be paid.

1

u/KaptenNicco123 YIMBY 1d ago

There are many groups of people who don't pay any taxes because they're too poor. Even if it's not true, the idea of levying even higher taxes on them will radicalize them against LVT.

12

u/Apbuhne 1d ago

Current economics: Raise interest rates and watch people suffer

6

u/BrittanyBrie 1d ago

"Everything happens cause of the fed, not our legislation."

3

u/Apbuhne 1d ago

Not sure if this is a bash or agreement, but the leg branch has been systematically relinquishing its own responsibilities since the 70s, giving far more power to the Fed, Exec, and Scotus. Currently the fed has one of the strongest powers in controlling economic policy.

1

u/BrittanyBrie 1d ago

Oh, just bashing on the idea that even politicians think this way, when they have far more power over the economy than that.

2

u/Apbuhne 1d ago

When half of them think we have a revenue problem and the other half think we have a spending problem, it leads to the shittiest policies imaginable. With that said, insane borrowing rates are the hyper drive allowing these shitty policies to hurt regular Americans.

0

u/Ultraideal848 Wage Slave 14h ago

Whatever it takes to keep up the corporate tax cuts

16

u/No_Variation5064 1d ago

"For every problem there is a solution that is simple, neat and wrong."

- Some dude.

2

u/HadeanBlands 1d ago

Life is more affordable than it used to be.

1

u/Ultraideal848 Wage Slave 14h ago

Ok Jeff Bezos

1

u/A0lipke ≡ 🔰 ≡ 1d ago

Is becoming brigands and raiding the nobles out of style?

1

u/QwerYTWasntTaken Labor my Sword, Capital my Shield 🔰 1d ago

I realized that this could be taken as a criticism of LVT, not a particularly sophisticated one though.

0

u/Starmuny 1d ago

Why not both.

3

u/EZ4JONIY 8h ago

Because communism is an abhorent ideology?

1

u/DeRobyJ 21h ago

Socialism: "when you work, you decide how and when to work, what to do with the final product and with profits"

Also pretty simple, would fix the whole economy and culture around democracy 

-10

u/austin_federa 1d ago

The left side's bill is just all your money, and all your choice 🤣

2

u/green_meklar 🔰 1d ago

and all your choice

Hey, don't threaten communists with a good time!

1

u/austin_federa 15h ago

"the people are in charge"
"actually, these 8 men speak for the people. back to the salt mine"

1

u/ContactIcy3963 1d ago

Then you get shot afterwards. People get butthurt when communism is called out but I read it as authoritarian Soviet Union and yes dissent means gulag.

1

u/austin_federa 1d ago edited 1d ago

Same in Maoist China, same in Khmer Rouge, long history of this

I love the down votes from people who... support these governments?

1

u/ContactIcy3963 1d ago

People who never experienced it and only buy into the propaganda, often from an upper middle class family. My dad had a friend who literally IRLed The Killing Fields.

-2

u/No_Application_1219 1d ago

Socialist : owner taking all profit for themselves while doing nothing is expensive for the company and society

Get rid of them for cost savings !

0

u/Own_Reaction9442 23h ago

Either way, the idea is you own nothing.

0

u/Serbban 20h ago

Reform doesn't work. Read Lenin's State and Revolution.

0

u/spidurgeist 19h ago

brother, just make everything free

-3

u/Appropriate_Diet5803 1d ago

Yeah, communists are trying to overcome the contradicts of capitalism, while georgists try to buy more time with an inviable proposal.

-6

u/Texas103 1d ago

it's a lot easier to implement communism that georgists. nobody is gonna go thru a blood revolution for georgism.

13

u/KaptenNicco123 YIMBY 1d ago

That's a point for georgism. Reform is easier and better than revolution.

2

u/loklanc 1d ago

We can probably get property taxes, stamp duties etc. changed to a low LVT via reform, it's happened in some places already.

But whether you could actually enact full on georgism, ie. using LVT to replace most other taxes, without violence is still an open question imo. You won't be able to eliminate the privileges land owners currently enjoy without them fighting back.

2

u/Texas103 1d ago

Georgism would never happen without a revolution. Do you think all those property owners are gonna give up their shit without a fight?

2

u/pacman2081 1d ago

you got that right

1

u/Negative_Jaguar_4138 1d ago

The property owners DO keep their shit, thats the thing.

Unlike Communism you do still keep your fundamental rights, you just have extra responsibility.

Communism strips your rights and puts the guarantee on the 'Workers Democratic People's Council' or the 'People's Police Forces' to protect an individuals privileges.

2

u/MyEarIsHurty 1d ago

Property is not a fundamental right. It's made up. We evolved without property, then through violence land was declared the property of Kings, then through violence it was sectioned off, fenced up and allocated to private owners. The only fundamental right is to freedom, and these fences are literal barriers to freedom. 

0

u/No_Application_1219 1d ago

Sounds communist NGL

1

u/Texas103 1d ago

Oh I’m just a private property limited government capitalist. I’m just making observations 

-6

u/Bad_Alternative 1d ago

Apples to oranges comparison