Georgism is stagnant. It isn't just stagnant, its dead except for very specific minor issues. But perhaps I can be proved wrong. Can a Georgist wannabe show significant recent Georgist content? I'll assume there won't be a response, but will love to be proved wrong
Check out Hong Kong, they had a form of it and it worked well. A simplified tax form is good for any country. Period.
Don't go with the single tax nonsense. It won't come out well! Can you refer to any recent significant Georgist content (i.e. we can exclude long dead George for obvious reasons)? Compare it with say Marxism. We can all have a pop at that lot! However, its also fair to say that since Marx the school of political economic thought has made great strides (affecting most academic disciplines and, in particular, providing a means to understand capitalist phenomena that can't be explained through more orthodox schools)
Your just making that up. The fact is that the land value tax scares the crud out of you, because you know that it would render your central planning dreams obsolete. Lets have a look at what some real economist think:
As expected, you've replied with nothing but your silly script. Of course we can refer to the use of land taxes. Georgist single tax, however, quickly became redundant. Since then they have messed about at the margins providing nothing of any interest. I of course note that you failed to provide even one example of Georgist recent economic contribution A useless marginal school that makes everyone else look inventive!
Crikey, your comment had as much value as a Georgist's economic contribution. Give yourself a pat on the bonce!
A long dead genius. Do you have any example of more recent Georgist contribution or are you completely reliant on hero-worship of George? As I said earlier, we can all whinge about Marx and some of his analysis. However, the amount of subsequent research has been impressive (even impacting on analysis used in orthodox economics)
I am somewhat of a "Georgist" myself. "In my opinion, the least bad tax is the property tax on the unimproved value of land, the Henry George argument..." Milton Friedman
Logistics. How would one distribute the tax revenue from the land tax? In the usual manner (i.e. in a discriminatory manner that goes to select races, religions or relative) as typical in the USA?
It wouldn't be possible to be non-discriminatory. The amount received would be inadequate. You could try property taxes and attacking the hard-pressed home owner
Fair argument, Reiver. However, convince me that Georgism isn't another intellectually thoughtful exercise like Communism or Libertarianism that fails in the real world (i.e. Russia and 1905 USA before regulations). If you were running it, I might seriously consider it as an exercise as you appear to be a nonpartisan intellectual. However, thugs tend to get in the way of a good theory.
I wouldn't call it 'intellectually thoughtful'. The problem is that its one dimensional and hasn't kept up with social developments. We may dislike the likes of communism, but Marxism certainly has continued to evolve and flourish (influencing not just economics)
Yippie......let it flourish all it wants, somewhere else. Inspite of our Marxist leaning president and the liberal party, they will never be as strong here as in other countries.
Most of the land rent collected from a land value tax would be used to replace current taxes which are economically destructive (such as taxes on production and trade). After other tax systems are abolished and government is sufficiently funded, the remaining funds could be distributed equally to all individual citizens as a citizens dividend. Government and community activities do increase land values substantially, but nature also contributes to land value, and the part that nature contributes rightfully belongs equally to all, rich and poor alike.
Try not to spam the thread! Let's remember its purpose: to provide an opportunity for Georgists to show Georgism's vibrancy by referring to recent research output. Can you refer to any such output? Had naff all so far!
For those unfamiliar with the subject, here is some analysis from Henry George comparing landownership to slavery:
