Re: 1911 Reference Book Cites The Single Tax

royls@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

If there is enough demand, you will make a proffit regardless of income
taxation.

But sometimes not enough to be worth the trouble, effort and risk.

The "worth" is based on the absolute amount of money he can take home
compared with what he can get by not doing it.
If by working (even with taxes of 90%) he take home 2 times or more than
what would if not working chances are he will work.

True, in some countries like Denmark for example, the taxation is so high
and the welfare so generous that some unskilled people may be better by not
working than by doing an activity. This is why I actually say that generous
welfare for unemployed must be linked to going back to school to get new
skills and scoring passing grades.

I am against encouraging lazyness both at the lower end (welfare) at at the
higher end (rich idle shareholders). I full support a strong welfare like
in Denmark if the unemployed go back to school to get a degree that will
provide him with a nice job.

It's "LVT," Einstein, and the refusal to think is all on the other
side. Oh, and speaking of Einstein and thinking....


http://www.cooperativeindividualism.org/einstein-albert_on-henry-george-1931.html

I assume that Einstein saw LVT as a way to reduce the polarization if
applied along other taxes.

You must not forget that Einstein has been pushing the whole idea of
egalitarianism to extreme, as in the well known paper "Why Socialism":

http://skeptically.org/ethicsutility/id23.html

I never criticized the idea of taxing the land. I pinpoint the idiotic
fundamentalistic approach to DISMANTLE EVERYTHING ELSE AND RELY EXCLUSIVELY
ON LVT. This taliban-libertarian like fundamentalism is what is stupid and
insane.

There are very few idea that are wrong in itself. The evil/insanity always
reside into pushing to the extreme into a direction.
And by this fact, Georgists wanting to eliminate everything else and have
LVT as unique tax are as insane as the suicidal bombers or libertarians.


Even if I put on you a tax on proffit of 99.99% you still take
home SOME proffit.

Nope. I simply will not bother producing anything for such a paltry
reward.

If that 0.01% is going to provide you with a middle class lifestyle while by
not doing it you will be a poor on welfare, then yeah baby. You are going
to do it.

Of course, if you see that somebody working less earn 10 times more, you
will stop being very productive. That is also true.


Without that taxation, the money went from the casino to casino
shareholder who from time to time lost his money in casino just to get
them back as dividends and so on.

Or spent it on doctors, etc.

Oooops, you forgot that part...

O baby, you really need to do more brainwork to develop it.

How much medical care a billionaire need compared with a poor ?
Do you believe that just because a billionaire have so much money he gets a
million times more flu than a poor ?

A billionaire ALREADY can afford all the medical care he need. Giving him
100M more per year won't buy a minute of medical care more than before.
If that money will be put in Medicare, 20000 poor families of 4 will be
fully covered.

The new wealth created into the society is direct proportional with the
speed of money flow over the productive paths. The government can
intervine to optimize the path and speed.

People will do that themselves, given the appropriate environment.

The market system is provable to become optimal into a very tight set of
conditions simultaneously met. Like:
- all players are roughly the same size or there is no form of size
advantage.
- all players have the same accumulated wealth
- all players have exactly the same information

You can see that the real market does not fulfill any of this condition,
nevermind all of them simultaneously. And, that is the condition for the
free market to become an optimal system.

For example, the Wall Street money are the slowest money into the economy
because they rarely take a productive path (only at an IPO or at new
market capitalization). If the government will tax more of these money and
use them to do direct investments in infrastructure the economy will be
stronger.

That's not taxing production.

Correct, Wall Street is gambling not production. Taxing gambling and putting
that money directly in production creates a more optimal system.


The ONLY thing that defy the speed of money flow rule is when the rich
shareholders/CEOs conspire to harm the economy in purpose as a result of
taxation. Well, yes this is a serious problem. But the REAL solution is
NOT to reduce taxation, but to reduce the economic power of a few
individuals in order to make them irrelevant economically.

The powerful individuals are not the problem. The problem is that
they have been given the power to profit without producing. Taxing
land rent removes much of that power.

Almost correct, I would say: "Taxing land rent removes _SOME_ of that
power."

Remember, LVT will not tax one cent from the multibillionaire gamblers while
will tax the *** out of the family farmer making the price of food to
skyrocket. You condemn the poor to starvation while encouraging gambling.

LVT will not tax one cent from the corporation that offshored all the jobs
in China or India while you will tax the companies that employ domestic
workforce. There are already a lot of loopholes that give to everybody else
unfair advantage over the domestic workers. You want to add another and
much bigger one.

And many more such nasty consequences. THINK PLEASE !!!!!


And in order to help the society to become more equalitarian and balanced,
BOTH a strongly progressive tax on income and tax on assets/land can be
used.

But the effects of taxing earned income and productive capital are
harmful to the economy and society because it discourages productive
effort and investment.

That is just a corporate PR. We heard it thousands of times from
libertarians: Tax cuts help the economy. Taxes are evil. No taxes are best,
when asked why Somalia (the no tax country) is no better than US
libertarians always change the subject then later come back with idiotic
mantra: Tax cuts help the economy. Taxes are evil. No taxes are best,
repeated ad nauseum to foul weak minded individuals.


Taxing land rent doesn't.

By the opposite. It encourage gambling over food production and destruction
of jobs over employment.



.

Quantcast