Re: Historical comparisons

on 7 Mar 2006 08:34:04 -0800, William Mook
<william.mook@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> sez:

` Roy,

` That you think I am defending privilege says it all. LOL. You're a
` damned socialist or worse, and you're arguing out of your ass.

` If anyone can participate in a free and open market, giving folks the
` ability to own private property in no way creates privileged castes.

Wrong. The notion that private property creates and preserves privilege
is Georgism, not socialism; an entirely different philosophy, well
developed and powerfully argued since Henry George devised it in the
19th century. The fundamental concept is that the earth is not the
product of human effort, it is a gift to us from nature, and no one
has the right to sequester it, especially not to charge others for
the right to occupy it. The only fair way to manage this unearned bounty
is for it to be regarded as the common inheritance of all humanity,
and thus for it to remain in the ownership of the people as a whole.
This requires the existence of fully representative government to
administer this ownership, and ensure that the benefits of bare
land are returned to the commonwealth of the population as a whole.

This outlook was a natural reaction to the history of land ownership
based on conquest and feudalism, where a despot (often called "monarch")
claimed all the land and dispersed it among his cronies, leaving
the mass of the population as tenants. This situation has changed
somewhat, but surprisingly not much, particularly in europe, and,
interestingly enough, despite the US origin in rebellion from
european monarchy, it is well on the way to emulating the european
model with its own landowning elite largely linked to the old
european land monopolists.

` And, that you think a working interest spreads risk and that's it,
` shows you are shuttered in your view of things to protect your flawed
` socialist paradigm.

` Bill.


--
==========================================================================
vincent@triumf[munge].ca Pete Vincent
Disclaimer: all I know I learned from reading Usenet.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Distribution & Redistribution
    ... It is amusing that you would consider me dishonest Mr. Roy, ... I apologize if misinterpreted your defense and definition of socialism ... the difference in how you would establish a national land value tax ... So you are retracting your position that I am a slave owner because I ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Santorum introduces more rent collection opps
    ... >mutual wealth, not private privilege. ... Allocating the return to applying the fruits of private labor to ... responsible for doing so is not privilege. ... >>> but rather serves to protect private property rights to land. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Flat tax proposal
    ... Copyright monopolies made him rich. ... >want Roy L? ... >they may have received land under one of the Homestead Acts—government ... order to buy a privilege, that does not legitimize the privilege. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Letwin: We will redistribute wealth
    ... >>> basis of socialism relies on the smart being willingly being enslaved ... and shifted away from labour earnings and spending and onto ... >>returns to capital (which is one area were pure capitalism does not justly ... >>Returns to land and capital are themselves parasitical since they directly ...
    (uk.politics.misc)
  • Re: Theories of underdevelopment
    ... >>There was plenty of fertile land available and then gold. ... They become, and not because of land taxes, but because they ... >>Was not proved, was stated, though the tax scheme might have helped. ... Poland just recently left socialism and is ...
    (sci.econ)