> I thought the whole point of Georgism was that land is a finite resource
Yes, exactly. That's why land should be taxed. Anybody can have as much land as they pay LVT for. Doesn't matter who possesses it or how much they possess as long as they pay the LVT. There's no need to over-complicate this.
> But you're saying that there is no limit to how much land anyone can own?
Nobody can *own* land. People can only *possess* land.
> So Bill Gates can own most of North America, as I heard he's trying to do (buying farmland)?"
If the land value is being taxed and he's paying for it, then where's the problem here?
If the land is being taxed to its maximum value, then it's also being used to its maximum efficiency. As determined by The Free Market.
And of course, the same rule applies to reproduction licenses. You can have as many children as you can pay for. Eventually there'd be a maximum quota after several generations in ideal circumstances.
Yes, exactly. That's why land should be taxed. Anybody can have as much land as they pay LVT for. Doesn't matter who possesses it or how much they possess as long as they pay the LVT. There's no need to over-complicate this.
> But you're saying that there is no limit to how much land anyone can own?
Nobody can *own* land. People can only *possess* land.
> So Bill Gates can own most of North America, as I heard he's trying to do (buying farmland)?"
If the land value is being taxed and he's paying for it, then where's the problem here?
If the land is being taxed to its maximum value, then it's also being used to its maximum efficiency. As determined by The Free Market.
And of course, the same rule applies to reproduction licenses. You can have as many children as you can pay for. Eventually there'd be a maximum quota after several generations in ideal circumstances.
|
posted by dennisn on July 10th, 2023 at 6:30PM
> Doesn't matter who possesses it or how much they possess
Are you retarded? So Bill Gates can deforest the entire Amazon Rainforest? He can probably afford it, given all the money he leeched from his corrupt government dealings. > Nobody can *own* land. People can only *possess* land. You're either dumb or dishonest. It's hard to tell now. In communism/georgism, the "central committee", the "inner circle" owns the land. SOMEONE obviously owns it, and defines the rules for it! Dude, you haven't thought through anything!? > then it's also being used to its maximum efficiency That's an undefined term in this context. It matters how the money was gotten - and the fact that you have no qualms that it was gotten by corruption ("Who gives a shit" -- Zero) is disturbing and will predictably lead to bad outcomes ... but sure, over many generations, the inefficiencies of evil (a subtle but important point that you probably don't even support) will sort themselves out - the righteous will outcompete the evil scum.
|
