A Boring Dystopia

15637 readers

736 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article

--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

givesomefucks@lemmy.world

1173

Borrowing money against their stuff to get more stuff to borrow money... (discuss.online)

submitted 2 days ago by bytesonbike@discuss.online to c/aboringdystopia@lemmy.world

202 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] madejackson@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

Finally a fellow georgist. How does one work to promote LVT? You mean you got paid to do it and despite that, you are now against georgism?

IMHO, your reasoning is weird and blown out of proportion. Measuring value of land and housing is easy and is done today for the market, for insurance and for taxing purposes. This could be a reason for georgism to become unpopular, but it isn't a reason against georgism.

in our case added 0 value to our property and in fact removed value

The common reasoning with negative value land. This is only brought up because it is an issue in todays world. It wouldn't even be an issue with an LVT. If a strip of land is only costing money, just give it back to the Gov so they need to take care for it, you're not a charity. Otherwise it has a measurable value which you are denying to win an argument.

It introduces just as many problems as it those it claims to solve.

No it doesn't. I see one "Problem" LVT doesn't solve, but you haven't mentioned this one yet.

It makes sense in some limited contexts, like say, urban land use across small and regular parcels, but not all land is urban land. You forget that George was writing when society 70% agricultural and rural and working off a model of undeveloped land.

This is not valid. George focused on New York. It did include everything from agriculture to fully developed Manhattan. It's called Land Value Tax, not Land Tax.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

No, i actually worked with economists, lawyers, and assessors on research projects. And everyone of them loved LVT in theory, but in practice sucked balls. Again and again, the research showed poor and awful outcomes when the direct implementation of the tax was studied and various municipalities that have tried it have totally and utterly failed and gone back to a property tax due, largely due to the overwhelming overhead costs involved with assessing and administering a LVT.

There is a huge gulf between theory and practice. Georgists sit around all day and theorize and idealize but never actually go into the trenches of tax law, tax policy, and tax enforcement.

[–] madejackson@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

Very interesting. Do you have any sources to share so I can read into that?

Also, I believe there are 2x publicly known sources for LVT being applied on a wide scale: Alaska and Singapore. Both are very successful and comfortably perform far above average compared to other US states / other countries. This somewhat directly contradicts your statements. So maybe your experience is not representative for LVT's performance, but rather your specific execution of it.

Just to be clear, LVT is just one form of resource tax. Actually all resource use including pollution and oil extraction etc. fall under my understanding of georgism.