• Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      How so? Land value tax is just supremely good tax policy, and we should be striving to replace our broken property tax system with it.

      Any progressive tax system that incentivizes new housing development, disincentivizes speculative land holding, empirically makes housing cheaper, and cannot be passed on to tenants is an absolute win in my book.

      • RichCaffeineFlavor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        Who gives a fuck how cleverly the administration of ‘free market solutions’ through tax policy is targeted towards ‘incentivizing’ landlords. This is a post about the parasitic relationship between landlord and tenant. I made a (glib) point about how it’s difficult to legislate against landlords because they get to use your money to lobby against you. What does your point have to do with any of that?

        • Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          It’s difficult, yes, but our society has fought and won battles against vested interests before. Good policy can be fought for and achieved, as evidenced by basically every successful country on earth.

          I just want to advocate for good policies in this thread so that we can solve some of our problems. In my experience, a lot of people can identify that there is a problem with the landlording class, but many people don’t know a whole lot about the underlying reasons why this dynamic exists or what we can do policy-wise to fix it.

          the parasitic relationship between landlord and tenant

          This is also part of the goal of land value taxes. If we all can agree that landlords’ hoarding and monopolization of finite land is what allows them to extract unearned profits from the rest of us, the land value tax is the mechanism to reclaim those rents. The idea is to turn landlording – a position of power and privilege with access to economic rents – into mere property management – a regular job where you earn income based on the labor you do in maintaining properties.

          • RichCaffeineFlavor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            It’s difficult, yes, but our society has fought and won battles against vested interests before.

            Yeah back when we had unions that would straight up murder scabs. Your thing, neoliberalism, works in the opposite direction. The results speak for themselves.

            The idea is to turn landlording – a position of power and privilege with access to economic rents – into mere property management – a regular job where you earn income based on the labor you do in maintaining properties.

            Then seize the land. If that’s your end goal then do it.

            Do you think you can trick the landlords into watching you do it slowly enough they don’t notice? You think you can trick capitalists into getting real jobs? Preposterous. You have no sense of class antagonism.

            • Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              Your thing, neoliberalism

              Except I’m not a neoliberal. Total strawman.

              Rather I’m a Georgist:

              Georgism, also called in modern times Geoism,[2][3] and known historically as the single tax movement, is an economic ideology holding that, although people should own the value they produce themselves, the economic rent derived from land—including from all natural resources, the commons, and urban locations—should belong equally to all members of society.[4][5][6] Developed from the writings of American economist and social reformer Henry George, the Georgist paradigm seeks solutions to social and ecological problems, based on principles of land rights and public finance which attempt to integrate economic efficiency with social justice.[7][8]

              Georgism is concerned with the distribution of economic rent caused by land ownership, natural monopolies, pollution rights, and control of the commons, including title of ownership for natural resources and other contrived privileges (e.g., intellectual property). Any natural resource which is inherently limited in supply can generate economic rent, but the classical and most significant example of land monopoly involves the extraction of common ground rent from valuable urban locations. Georgists argue that taxing economic rent is efficient, fair, and equitable. The main Georgist policy recommendation is a tax assessed on land value, arguing that revenues from a land value tax (LVT) can be used to reduce or eliminate existing taxes (such as on income, trade, or purchases) that are unfair and inefficient. Some Georgists also advocate for the return of surplus public revenue to the people by means of a basic income or citizen’s dividend.

              For reference, several historians credit Henry George’s publication of Progress and Poverty as defining the start of the Progressive Era:

              Progress and Poverty, George’s first book, sold several million copies,[1] becoming one of the highest selling books of the late 1800s.[2][3] It helped spark the Progressive Era and a worldwide social reform movement around an ideology now known as ‘Georgism’. Jacob Riis, for example, explicitly marks the beginning of the Progressive Era awakening as 1879 because of the date of this publication.[4]

                • Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 months ago

                  Lol what?

                  You keep on trying to put me into little ideological boxes so you don’t have to engage with a new-to-you economic ideology.

                  And for the record, libertarians are dumb af and almost uniformly oppose the Georgist vision of land. And carbon taxes. And severance taxes. And unions. Andl YIMBYism. And IP reform. And so many other Georgist ideas that neoliberals and libertarians typically hate.

                  It’s especially funny because libertarian types love to call us land commies. Clearly we can’t be simultaneously libertarian and land commies…

                  • RichCaffeineFlavor@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    8 months ago

                    I put you into a larger ideological box than the one you put yourself in. You complained that you weren’t a plant, you were a tree.

                    And yes I agree libertarians are dumb as fuck and I offer you the additional observation that there is no ‘true’ libertarian and they talk shit about each other all the time.

                    My source is a group of people I’ve already described as stupid

                    lol

                    lmao