@Anubis2814@YouTube I have entertained the ideas brought about by Georgism but I have ultimately came to the conclusion that the solution to the problem posed by Henry George is not an 100% Land Value Tax but democratisation of the ownership of land.
@Minna72849672@Anubis2814@YouTube How would this democratic ownership of land operate? Genuinely asking. Like how does the community decide who gets to use which bits of land?
And a tangential question is why do you think that solution is superior to LVT? But you can answer whichever question you prefer first.
@GeorgistSimp@Minna72849672@YouTube I didn't realize what tweet I was responding to and didn't understand what LVT was. There are many schools of thought, Though one would just nationalize all land that wasn't personal property(land u personally used and put labor into), not to be confused with private property.
@GeorgistSimp@Anubis2814@YouTube Please see my other post in this same thread. There are a number of structures in which you can use to democratise the ownership of land and they include housing co-ops, community land trusts, resident owned communities, etc.
@GeorgistSimp@Anubis2814@YouTube Reason #1 as too why I believe that this is the better solution: the single LVT solution is a solution where I foresee dystopian situations that I would preferably like to avoid.
@GeorgistSimp@Anubis2814@YouTube One of the dystopian situations is that no one could afford any land aside from those that already own corporate monopolies, resulting in the companies creating company towns with the land.
@GeorgistSimp@Anubis2814@YouTube The second (and the more likely) scenario, in which I would like to is the state effectively becoming the Georgist landlord that you all so despise. Such a state will be incentivised to be undemocratic and being imperialist.
@GeorgistSimp@Anubis2814@YouTube The beauty of land democratisation is that it addresses George's problem with land without risking these dystopic scenarios.
As the nation’s housing crisis deepens during the COVID-19 pandemic, we urgently need new approaches and institutions that center permanent affordability, community ownership and control, and the long-term goal of decommodification.
@GeorgistSimp@Anubis2814@YouTube Caveats: - this does not mean that we don't have publically/state owned land. - whilst the dystopic scenarios that I've mentioned are not guaranteed, they are scenario I'd rather not risk. - this democratisation solution is likely not compatible with the LVT solution
But they only do so within small groups of people. So each CLT serves the interest of its members, but has no reason to care about serving the wellbeing of outsiders.
@Minna72849672@Anubis2814@YouTube So while CLTs are an improvement, they still end up with rent-seeking by groups of people with privileged access to the best locations, with many of the same harmful incentives that existing NIMBY homeowners associations have.
@GeorgistSimp@Anubis2814@YouTube And also: - you've asked why I believe my solution is a better solution and I've answered that. I am not looking for an argument or a debate. - I could go into more detail but this thread is already way too long.
@Minna72849672@Anubis2814@YouTube Oh okay. Well I've given my reasons for thinking CLTs aren't as good of a solution as LVT, but we don't need to argue about it. Thanks for giving your perspective, I appreciate it.
I think we generally share the same goals, just different ideas about how to best achieve them.
@GeorgistSimp@Anubis2814@YouTube Again, not looking for an argument, but CLTs are not the only structure, neither is a housing co-op. I will say that I have the view of democratising the workplace as well but you can have democratic land ownership as well as capitalism.
@GeorgistSimp@Anubis2814@YouTube There are also different models of the said structures as well. So one CLT or Resident Owned Community or housing co-op will be very different from another. My goal is democratisation of everything practical but democratic land ownership is completely compatible with capitalism.
@Minna72849672@Anubis2814@YouTube It would be the same critique for me, that when this democratising happens for small circles of land & residents, they still have the incentive to rent-seek at those locations and no incentive to care about enabling newcomers.
@bufordsharkley@Anubis2814@YouTube I wouldn't consider LVT to be democratic, as this policy can be implemented by the worst of tyrants or autocrats and be abused for them to be imperialist a**holes.
@bufordsharkley@Anubis2814@YouTube In such a case, the land is effectively owned by an autocratic state and therefore not democratically owned. This is one of the reasons why I don't believe that LVT is a good solution.
@Anubis2814@YouTube Land can be democratised through structures such as Housing co-ops and Community Land Trusts. Although there may be more structures or there that can democratise land ownership.
Obelix
in reply to Anubis2814 • •Minna
in reply to Anubis2814 • •Stephen Hoskins 🔰🧦🌐🌽
in reply to Minna • •And a tangential question is why do you think that solution is superior to LVT? But you can answer whichever question you prefer first.
Anubis2814
in reply to Stephen Hoskins 🔰🧦🌐🌽 • •Minna
in reply to Stephen Hoskins 🔰🧦🌐🌽 • •Minna
in reply to Minna • •Minna
in reply to Minna • •Minna
in reply to Minna • •Minna
in reply to Minna • •Minna
in reply to Minna • •Revisiting community control of land and housing in the wake of COVID-19
TheNextSystem.orgMinna
in reply to Minna • •- this does not mean that we don't have publically/state owned land.
- whilst the dystopic scenarios that I've mentioned are not guaranteed, they are scenario I'd rather not risk.
- this democratisation solution is likely not compatible with the LVT solution
Stephen Hoskins 🔰🧦🌐🌽
in reply to Minna • •But they only do so within small groups of people. So each CLT serves the interest of its members, but has no reason to care about serving the wellbeing of outsiders.
Stephen Hoskins 🔰🧦🌐🌽
in reply to Stephen Hoskins 🔰🧦🌐🌽 • •LVT & redistribution is superior here because it
Stephen Hoskins 🔰🧦🌐🌽
in reply to Stephen Hoskins 🔰🧦🌐🌽 • •Minna
in reply to Minna • •- you've asked why I believe my solution is a better solution and I've answered that. I am not looking for an argument or a debate.
- I could go into more detail but this thread is already way too long.
Stephen Hoskins 🔰🧦🌐🌽
in reply to Minna • •I think we generally share the same goals, just different ideas about how to best achieve them.
Minna
in reply to Stephen Hoskins 🔰🧦🌐🌽 • •Minna
in reply to Minna • •Stephen Hoskins 🔰🧦🌐🌽
in reply to Minna • •Hervey “Mark Mollineaux” Okkles 🦀🚰
in reply to Minna • •Minna
in reply to Hervey “Mark Mollineaux” Okkles 🦀🚰 • •Minna
in reply to Minna • •Hervey “Mark Mollineaux” Okkles 🦀🚰
in reply to Minna • •But to achieve democratic control of land, this tool is essentially necessary (more transparent than pure state ownership, for instance)
Hervey “Mark Mollineaux” Okkles 🦀🚰
in reply to Hervey “Mark Mollineaux” Okkles 🦀🚰 • •onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.111…
Minna
in reply to Anubis2814 • •