Re: Labor theory of cost

On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 18:00:18 -0700, The Trucker in sci.econ
confessed to the world saying:
.. . .
If we accept my definition of the word "goods" as things produced by labor
then, yes, land is not an economic "good". It is just land. But I don't
think that is what you mean when you use the word "good". You are using
the word in the normal vernacular. In that sense land is most definitely
an economic good as humans being cannot exist without it. But the natural
"goodness' of the land is not a function of labor applied. i.e. no cost.

I'm using the term in the sense of economic good -- not
personal good. Land is an economic good because and economic
decision must be made regarding it's allocation due to scarcity.
The condition of necessity is not required. The physical fact
the humans must occupy some space by the laws of physics
is beside this point.

.. . .
The claim that surplus value belongs to all is the same as the
claim nature belongs to all. It's not a fact.

An alternative view is also not a hard irrivocable fact. Rights claims
are not on a par with gravity. I say that we all have equal use rights to

Agreed and I'm sure you position in not merely blind aherance
to what someone has taught you to think.

that which nature provided because that is, to me, a matter of justice. It
will also produce the best economic results if we are attempting to
maximize productivity, freedom from want, longivity, and quality of life.
I'm not particularly interested in how high the skyscrapers are or what
the GDP is doing this year, or how many polo ponies the Bush family may
own.

What we do see
in a market economy is a division of surplus between the
producers and the consumers that are actually directly
involved in those exchanges.

Only a very special pair of glasses would allow anyone to see that
in our current economy. We can debate as to whether or not the current
economy is a "market economy", but you will lose if you insist on
privatization of natural resources. That is because it is such
prizatization that prevents the market from working as it should. Wages
are continually depressed by the privatization of natural resources.

?

The wage, following classical theory on distribution are
not changes at all. The income of the person might change
but that's only because they keep the rent rather than
pay someone else.

This, of course gets back to the core question:
Is private ownership of nature to be allowed or not?

You say no. You have your set of views and filters that
lead to that conclusion. Fine.

We can debate if today's system in either the USA or
most of the industrually developed societs are "market
economies" and we can debate the extent to which any
deviation from that condition affect my statement about
division of the surplus value (and here I suppose we
need to clarify if we're talking total area between
S & D or only the money surplus existing between
S and P).

Your argument that wages are continually depressed by the
privatization of natural resources seems faulty at best since
in the socities where such privatization exists most
instensly are the ones where the return to labor produces
the greatest return in general.

This does I think raise an interesting question and
claim you could make. If we're increasing individual
private owenship of nature within a society isn't that
a bit like making it "public" like you're suggesting.
Could it be this very basterized approach to getting
everyone "free" access to Land proving your point?

Maybe.

The counter I'd raise here is that process whereby
the land is allocated and people are claiming their
share of the "rent" pie will differ substantially and
it's that process that will be critical to the success
of either approach. The decentralized,individual
decision-making with all kinds of successive contracts
threading and weaving thoughout the social network
of exchange relationship will produce different
outcomes than the centralized, social choice setting
where the LVT approach will exist.

Yes, I know, the claim is that the bids to use the
land (or the use set at some calulated rent level)
are supposed to meet or beat the market result
with rents only going to land owners. The theory is
applied without considering the institutional
structure in which it will be implemented which
is the big problem.


There is also the other can of giant worms which has to do with peak oil
and global warming. It occurs to some of us that while the current

Not that I want to get into the global warming discussion much
but last I heard the real cause of GW was an internal geological
process that was causing the oceans to warm and not green house
gas emmissions.

version of "capitalism" loves to lay claim to the amazing advance of
population and living standards it may well be that the same version of
capitalism is also going to be the cause of a massive die off. I am not
going to wager a big pile of my chips on this capitalism bashing, but I
fail to see how privatization of natural resources is an adeguate answer
to our forthcoming environmental problems. And defining "capital"
correctly allows me to attack true rent without attacking capitalism.

Even if the cause of warming is not geological I think you'll
be hard pressed to show how rents are the ultimate cause of
global warming because they stimulating the production of these
greenhouse gases. If anything, based on the proposition Georgists
advocate, under the LVT and public land things should be worse
not better than now.

jmh
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: AMI Free Monetary Seminars in Seceral Cities
    ... Concurrent tax reform of location rent taxation, ... destroys selling price of land, the financial cornerstone of the Debt Web. ... Govnmt should pay the banks for this service, ... redistribution and set the economy free again. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Venture Communism Draft IV -- Request for Comments.
    ... When you rent an apartment from a private landlord you are not ... the community can offer land for rent and accept the offer of ... Ridiculous, wealth accumulation is the standard measure of wealth, not ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: AMI Free Monetary Seminars in Seceral Cities
    ... Concurrent tax reform of location rent taxation, ... destroys selling price of land, the financial cornerstone of the Debt Web. ... Govnmt should pay the banks for this service, ... in the economy, they are not themselves the product of effort. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Labor theory of cost
    ... It is just land. ... in our current economy. ... are continually depressed by the privatization of natural resources. ... Even if the rent is ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Smith and Mill: Georgists?
    ... "A tax on rent falls wholly on the landlord. ... -- Professor James Errol Thorold Rogers, Political Economy ... productive land ...
    (sci.econ)
Loading