U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Unread 08-02-2012, 12:06 AM
 
12,214 posts, read 7,074,443 times
Reputation: 4439
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post

Nope......try actually reading the book. He prefers government ownership of land, but advocated for using taxation to create de facto government ownership due to existing laws. He was being realistic.....

Remind me to never believe a thing you say. One has a preference for the best option. You got it wrong, again.



We could simply abolish private titles and declare all land public property. Then, lease lots to the highest bidders, under conditions guaranteeing the right to improvements. This would give a complex society the same equality of rights achieved in simpler communities through equal shares of land. And by leasing land to whoever could obtain the most from it, we would secure the greatest production.
But such a plan, though perfectly feasible, is not the best option. Rather, I propose to accomplish the same results in a simpler, easier, and quieter way.

To formally confiscate all land would involve a needless shock, and would require a needless extension of government. Both can be avoided. Great changes are best brought about under old forms. When nature makes a higher form, it takes a lower one and develops it. This, too, is the law of social growth. Let us work with it.

I do not propose to purchase or confiscate private property in land. Let those who now hold land retain possession, if they want. They may buy and sell or bequeath it. Let them even continue to call it "their" land. We may safely leave them the shell, if we take the kernel.

It is not necessary to confiscate land -- only to confiscate rent.
Taking rent for public use does not require that the state lease land; that would risk favoritism, collusion, and corruption. No new government agency need be created; the machinery already exists. Instead of extending it, all we have to do is to simplify and reduce it.

Government already takes some rent in taxation. With a few changes in our tax laws, we could take almost all. Letting owners keep a small percentage would cost much less than renting through a state agency. Using the existing machinery of government, we may assert the common right to land without any shock.

Therefore, I propose that we appropriate land rent for public use, through taxation.

- Henry George.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Unread 08-02-2012, 01:42 AM
 
26,105 posts, read 20,661,782 times
Reputation: 13297
as long as we got the crystal ball out whats my wife getting me for my birthday?.

really folks ,if anyone had the ability to predict the economic future they would be the wealthiest person on the planet as wall street would pay them anything they wanted.

the reality is no one knows and anyone who assumes things can play out only the way they see it is in story book land.

the only thing missing from their assuptions usually is they didnt start with once upon a time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 08-02-2012, 08:40 AM
 
12,214 posts, read 7,074,443 times
Reputation: 4439
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
as long as we got the crystal ball out whats my wife getting me for my birthday?.

really folks ,if anyone had the ability to predict the economic future they would be the wealthiest person on the planet as wall street would pay them anything they wanted.

the reality is no one knows and anyone who assumes things can play out only the way they see it is in story book land.

the only thing missing from their assuptions usually is they didnt start with once upon a time.
Lets talk assumptions.

You have brain washed yourself into a profit seeking perspective. I predict if I go to work, I will get a pay check. I also predict that if repair my car, that I will have added value. Profit seeking perspectives have no sense of reality. When the Internet was new, a web site was an "investment". Now that it is not considered a novel advantage over a competitor, its becomes an "expense". Anyone can see a telephone is very useful but its an "expense". Anyone can see that the novel business the phone system may support is for "profit", but may not work at all. The difference is when one has an advantage over the market, it can create a profit. Predicting where one can make profits is inherently difficult because most people by definition of market forces cannot know about it.

If I start using phones, and few others do, I think I can assume I will compete well with what ever advantage phones give me. Seems that every other business thinks the same thing and predict, with near 100% success ,they will compete better with phones. When it comes top profit seeking its a matter of knowing who will implement it the best.

That is why people who apply what they think they know in micro economics make macro economic train wrecks. Lots of things are predictable and what people know about it is reflected in the market everyday. Most people know grain prices will be up because of drought. Problem is its so easy to predict the market as already reacted.

You are full of assumptions thyself.

Last edited by gwynedd1; 08-02-2012 at 09:07 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 08-02-2012, 08:47 AM
 
12,214 posts, read 7,074,443 times
Reputation: 4439
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
QE will not bloat rents, rents are determined by supply and demand and there is no shortage of capital to build new structures. If anything QE should lower rents as it lowers the borrowing costs to build new structures....

I just realized you don't even know what I am talking about. I am talking about economic rents as is obvious by the context. And you say you read Henry George who specifically was talking about ground rents?


Economic Rents financial definition of Economic Rents. Economic Rents finance term by the Free Online Dictionary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 08-02-2012, 09:01 AM
 
Location: 3rd Rock fts
656 posts, read 425,442 times
Reputation: 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majordomo
Inflation is the point of QE. They are attempting the prevent deflation. If QE didn't cause inflation then we would be dealing with deflation. All the inflation QE has created is in front of you.
Bingo. The FED/economists have been mulling over what to do about “Deflation” for the last ~15 years. As for the inflation that’s in front of you; it’s fictitious/manufactured IMHO.

Printing money (lower borrowing costs to counteract deflation) only works if someone uses it in the Economy. The Banksters/Big Business aren’t using it; the citizenry is all tapped out; so it’s up to the US Gov’t to use it—not a good path for the US taxpayer to go down.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Retroit
The more the g*******t [financial elite] interferes with the economy, the less the economy is able to work on its own. Socialists can't stand the thought that the economy goes in cycles, so they artificially try to sustain it, which only postpones the recovery.
I corrected your quote Retroit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 08-02-2012, 09:05 AM
 
12,214 posts, read 7,074,443 times
Reputation: 4439
Now back to QE and the question I asked in 2008:

http://www.city-data.com/forum/7943821-post9.html
....my question is what will absorb new debt? Who is going to take on debt and in particular bank credit?
What is going to secure new loans to grow the money supply? "My prediction" back then was either depression or high deficits with implication that Americans, not knowing how money works, will make it politically impossible to make the deficits high enough. So Americans cannot deleverage to manageable debt because the only way to do that is for the public debt to leverage up. That is why we are here.

QE only worked because it added liquidity to those who still had equity. That card has been played just as I said 4 years ago in the so called impossible thing to guess even as it was to me completely obvious .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 08-02-2012, 12:53 PM
 
29,991 posts, read 17,492,373 times
Reputation: 12266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majordomo View Post
I don't know if it is really pointless. QE has encouraged me to save less and invest more. My real return on savings is negative and I'm not the only person fighting negative returns. QE pushed many of us into investing more in our stock market. Judging by the last two rounds of QE, we can expect another drop in the market followed by another huge bull run from around November up until the end of April. QE may not be doing much for the economy or the little guy but it really helps my portfolio. I hope to see QE4 November 2013.
Can you say bubble?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 08-03-2012, 07:50 AM
 
10,964 posts, read 3,560,097 times
Reputation: 3076
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse276 View Post
Where is all the 'inflation' that some have predicted QE would cause?

Now, let's take your line of thinking to tax cuts. Clinton raised taxes, paid down part of the deficit & the economy was steadily improving. Later, tax cuts were pushed & we have the opposite. So, why should we keep cutting taxes?


At the end of the day this seems like little more than simplistic trolling. It doesn't seem like you're interested in facts, just a political cage match. Have fun!
The two biggest sources of inflation are wage inflation and commodity inflation. The current employment situation in the United States and Europe will preclude any wage inflation in the immediate future. You can through in the search for low cost manufacturing in the Pacific Rim as another factor holding down wage inflation. Even China is being affected by this as manufacturing jobs are moving out of China and into places like Malaysia and the Philippines.

There is a real risk of commodity inflation in food prices due to the drought this summer. But if there is a good crop next year it will only be temporary. The worldwide economic slowdown we are now experiencing will hold down inflation of metals, and other natural resources.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 08-03-2012, 09:24 AM
 
10,964 posts, read 3,560,097 times
Reputation: 3076
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retroit View Post
The more the government interferes with the economy, the less the economy is able to work on its own. Socialists can't stand the thought that the economy goes in cycles, so they artificially try to sustain it, which only postpones the recovery.
The economy "working on it's own" at this stage probably means a global depression circa 1929. Your stance is exactly the one Herbert Hoover took at the outset of the Great Depression. As he would later learn that's not a politically viable stance to take, not to mention the amount of economic devastation it caused. The reality is that if Europe doesn't get it's act together and put a plan together to backstop the bonds of Spain, Portugal, and Italy that's probably where we may be headed anyway.

The issue isn't avoiding recessions of the effect of the business cycle. There is NOTHING that can stop the business cycle of expansions and recessions from occurring. The real issue is how to mitigate the effect of these cycles on people's lives and the economy as whole.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 08-03-2012, 09:55 AM
 
12,214 posts, read 7,074,443 times
Reputation: 4439
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retroit View Post
The more the government interferes with the economy, the less the economy is able to work on its own. Socialists can't stand the thought that the economy goes in cycles, so they artificially try to sustain it, which only postpones the recovery.
Another "I don't understand it" argument masquerading as the market will just fix it. . What postponed it was bailouts to Wall Street. Were "socialists" and progressives in favor of this? Its all well and good to criticize progressives for da guberment messes but Wall Street is running da guberment. This is not a cycle. This is rigged. Oh I know that economics is just so hard to understand, but mind if I give it a shot anyway?

If da guberment did not bail out Wall Street their housing backed assets would have plummeted along with the houses falling in their laps. They would be forced to sell them at the price the market would accept. At some point the market would begin to buy them back more in line for what they are worth, which is relative to wages. This would have put a stake in the heart of the speculative housing bubble and wiped out those behind the neo feudalistic scam. It would have been, now listen carefully, market forces that would have done them in.

However da guberment covered their bad bets and gave them the liquidity to starve out the market and the average wage slave again. They are at this very moment keeping housing off the market because they were given all the liquidity they needed from da guberment to wait out the suckers and wage slaves. I guess keeping houses off the market while stuffing them full of treasuries is a "natural" and virtuous cartel. Naturally da banksters found their usual allies in the upper middle class with fat net worths in housing. Gen-y was butchered on the blocks. Don't tell me this is a market cycle.


But hey what do I know about marginal utility, scarcity and monopolistic practices to extract economic rents.? After all most economists, as was said in this forum, think Henry George is wrong. Henry George would think that this bad economy has something to do with land speculation, you know like a housing bubble. He is clearly wrong. This is just a natural cycle. That is what the Fed kept saying right up to 2008.

A market force cycle would have popped the bubble, defaults would have been nigh, and the right people would have been punished.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $74,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:38 AM.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top