/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"I ain’t driving twenty minutes to riot"

catalog
Mode: Reply
Name
E-mail
Subject
Message

Max message length: 8192

Files

Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3

Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

Remember to follow the rules


/leftypol/ is a non-sectarian board for leftist discussion. Join our matrix! https://matrix.to/#/+leftychat:matrix.org

Georgism Anonymous 07/28/2020 (Tue) 02:05:06 No. 724844
What do you think about this man and his thought? I kind of "found out" about Georgism recently and I find it pretty interesting honestly, Citizen's dividend paired with Land Value Tax and Universal Basic Income makes a lot of sense in my mind and seems more achievable through gradual means instead of a revolution. Seems like the best way to synthezise actual social justice with the ""good"" things that capitalism seems to bring out, like entrepreneurship and lower prices through means of competition. I think I'm gonna be eaten alive by this but I want to know your thoughts on why this theory would be bad.
real estate industry would fight tooth and nail to prevent land value tax, they are among the most ruthless gangsters like the military industrial complex
>>724876 Well, yes, but it has been implemented in a handful of nations with success.
>>724927 go ahead and try implementing it in nyc, sf, vancouver, sydney, etc. if it's so easy
>>724844 I was intrigued by it at one point in time, but most value is created from industrial output by now.
>>724967 Well, considering that the land value tax is set at exactly the level that reduces the sale price of the land to exactly zero, and that of course this means that different regions of land will often generate different amounts of tax revenue per unit area, it would still be quite fucking useful even today.
>>724927 Really? Curious to learn more about this. My understanding is that a Land Value Tax is basically a form of utopian socialism that's impossible to get without a revolution due to immense entrenched interests and if it were gotten would threaten the existence of the capitalist system.
(51.93 KB 726x239 socialism.jpg)
Personally I think it's a good logic to appeal to normies to institute policies that can fatally undermine capitalism
>>724986 We should form natural allies with reforms that would collapse the capitalist system, but be careful not to delude ourselves into thinking they are actually possible.
>>724876 >real estate industry would fight tooth and nail to prevent land value tax No offense comrade, but how is that an argument against it you hobby-commmunist cunt? >>724983 It's not utopian, but obsessing over it as if landlords were the only thing wrong with capitalism means having tunnel-vision.
>>724844 >All these “socialists” since Colins have this much in common that they leave wage labour and therefore capitalist production in existence and try to bamboozle themselves or the world into believing that if ground rent were transformed into a state tax all the evils of capitalist production would disappear of themselves. The whole thing is therefore simply an attempt, decked out with socialism, to save capitalist domination and indeed to establish it afresh on an even wider basis than its present one. >This cloven hoof (at the same time ass’s hoof) is also unmistakably revealed in the declamations of Henry George. And it is the more unpardonable in him because he ought to have put the question to himself in just the opposite way: How did it happen that in the United States, where, relatively, that is in comparison with civilised Europe, the land was accessible to the great mass of the people and to a certain degree (again relatively) still is, capitalist economy and the corresponding enslavement of the working class have developed more rapidly and shamelessly than in any other country! https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1881/letters/81_06_20.htm
>>726098 >Marx is referring to Henry George, Progress and Poverty [available at Ludwig von Mises Institute Sick burn, real mature of you marxists.org. Anyway, a further conversation of sorts: https://merionwest.com/2019/06/02/through-letters-the-gap-between-henry-george-and-karl-marx/ >Let the socialists come with us, and they will go faster and further in this direction than they can go alone; and when we stop they can, if they choose, try to keep on. But if they must persist in bringing to the front their schemes for making the state everything and the individual nothing, let them maintain their socialistic labor party and leave us to fight our own way…
>>726098 This "critique" feels really empty, honestly. Seems like Marx didn't even read Henry at all, since he certainly didn't think the land value tax would solve all the problems in the world...
Magnum Opus of Henry George
>>726062 I don't see anything of the sort that George actually argued for.
>>726098 Can't you Marxists think for yourselves for once? The critique has no actual content, no argument, just a comparison (are we supposed to believe it is unflattering?) to turbo Marxist ideas. It is precisely Georgism's so-called "half-measure" of recognising a reasonable and well-optimized division between public and private that makes it so good. A land tax is an unavoidable cost you pay when you own and use land, it can be used to eliminate income taxes on labour and other regressive taxes, and it simultaneously targets unearned sources of private wealth that rightfully belong to society and incentivizes efficient use of land (which can be used to encourage rewilding of land for environmental purposes). For some reason Marxists cry bitch tears about surplus value but are unable to see the benefit in organising taxation in an intelligent and targeted way (as opposed to a merely aggressive and envious way) to actually improve the lives of workers. Ironically, it is better for political Marxism if workers feel constantly exploited and shittier, so the incentive to improve things is actually not as great as the incentive to grab more power using the pretext of improving things. George was right when he said Marx was >the prince of muddle-heads and that he >lacked analytical power and logical habits of thought. He certainly seems to me a most superficial thinker. George was by far the truer progressive and the fairer intellect. Marxists have wasted over a hundred years sperging out arguing that slaves should be publicly owned rather than privately owned. Georgism was focused on the problem that slaves existed in the first place.
>>737743 Wow a Georgist. That's rare.
(31.69 KB 250x348 nechaev-e1319485259842.jpg)
>>737743 >George was by far the truer progressive and the fairer intellect. Marxists have wasted over a hundred years sperging out arguing that slaves should be publicly owned rather than privately owned. Georgism was focused on the problem that slaves existed in the first place. As a former Georgist, this is blatantly incorrect. Georgism does not tackle the issue of "slaves" in its totality at all, it just tackles a singular aspect of the slavery. George fails to understand that rent itself is embedded within the framework of capitalism, and that capitalist production results in what is effectively a rent extracted upon the entirety of the working class. He also, just like you assumably do, gives legitimacy to electorialist politics. If electoralism itself was a proper or practical way to implement necessary measures, why was George constantly sidelined at every turn? Why was he thrown aside for mayorship, his ideas only barely considered by those in government and only ever implemented anywhere else in half-measures? You talk a big game about improving the conditions of the working class, but if you forever lack the power to do so, are you really helping anyone at all? Marxism tackles the issue of capital as it is, at it's very roots and mechanisms, and so he consiquetially addresses rent by the elimination of its dominant conjoined twin. You would eliminate petty rent, but not do away with the larger rent on society proper, and so would condemn us to the inevitable realization of petty rent as capitalist reform breaks down. You would give the working class a boon, only for it to crumble away in its hands. But we would give it a weapon, both tool and sword to cut away its bindings and throttle it's captors.
Now is a really bad time to shill for programs like Georgism. Sure, they are more likely to win over normies. However, they are totally inept at dealing with global scale problems. Georgism would alleviate some of the suffering of people at the individual level where it was implemented (probably) but it would be completely unable to deal with larger problems that arise out of the logic of markets and commodities (like climate change).
>>737798 Georgism is actually decently eco-friendly, it encourages efficient use of land and taxes the hell out of large amounts of land. Also, Georgism isn't a "complete ideology" by itself, it's sort of a set of measures that can be applied on top of an existing government. For example, you could have other taxes, you could have state provided education and health care, you could have blah blah blah. That's what makes it so flexible. It can also be a disadvantage but reality has proved that pragmatism ultimately deforms the original ideology, as we can see in the various attempts at achieving a Marxist-Leninist society.
>>737806 >but reality has proved that pragmatism ultimately deforms the original ideology, as we can see in the various attempts at achieving a Marxist-Leninist society The Soviets failed because of their eventual inability to do what was necessary and implement pragmatic policy, not because they were "too pragmatic". If anything, their adherence to a conceptual form of "democracy" is what restricted them, depute such a governance being the opposite of practical.

Delete
Report

no cookies?