what is/was the superior system?
Georgism 100%. The land value tax is amazing in implementation. Georgeism when implemented has literally enabled huge turn arounds. It is only the system that the PRC both under Deng Xiaoping and Friderich Hayek said had something thing right with both willing to admit that land value taxes were the best taxes. If anything, it is not adopted often because it utterly destorys guts of elites from using rent extraction behaviors. This is not to state mutualism and distributiism are bad per se but Georgism has a huge track record whether it is modernizing Japan, China, Estonia, Taiwan come to mind. Things literally get worse when it is removed or altered a bit too much.
>>18680486Between those 3, Georgism. The other 2 are just nonsense. But free market capitalism is still the actual best economic system. Land value tax may be the least bad tax but it is still bad.
>>18680601partially disagree. the free market has no safety valve for vulnerable citizens. in reality you're no different than the Canadian government is which ostensibly left of liberal who wants euthanize people who can't afford state insured medical coverage.
>>18680486posting an AI imagine on /his/ should get you permabanned
>>18680814This board deserves to die, so fair enough. I'm 95% of the other anons. The other 5% are Indians.
>>18680812>the free market has no safety valve for vulnerable citizensThe free market has the same safety valve as a democratic state, the people's desire to help vulnerable citizens. But more importantly, the free market would result in cheaper healthcare and more jobs so the number of people who require such a safely valve would be a lot less.
>>18680841sure, lets get the retarded and old people to work heavy machinery. great optics!
Georgism is just property taxes
>>18681355Or you could just privately fund safety nets. Keep in mind that the economy would be stronger, people would make more and keep more of their income, so it would be easier for families to privately provide for their less fortunate loved ones. Then charities could provide for the few remaining destitutes.
>>18681358Not property taxes. Georgist endorse land value taxes, very very different.Property taxes are focused on the combined value of the land and its improvements, such as houses, commercial buildings, additions, and renovations. Consequently, improving a property can increase its tax bill. This is why for example corporations can buy houses and screw up property taxes for people and then they get priced out of where they live. It also punishes actual living in the houses in practice and incentivizes speculation or creates special classes like homestead exemptions for people who get subidized by others around them. A land value tax (LVT), by contrast, taxes only the unimproved value of the land, principally the value produced by its location, permitted uses, surrounding infrastructure, and nearby economic activity,while excluding buildings and other owner-created improvements from the tax base. This means that it punishes speculation and not used land. This prevents the above stuff property taxes do. Basically, it punishes you trying the stuff mentioned above and incentivizes you to actually use your land in various ways. Politically, it could be used by various accounts of political economy actually. However, Georgist identiify it as the original sin or major issue that screws everything up. Elites tend to absolutely fear LVT taxes because you can't dodge them; they have a very high tax incidence.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8bvin28SbA&t=41s
>>18680486Georgism is the most workable and realistic one
>>18681944To be precise the Georgist identify land as a uniquely problematic good and land speculation and rent-seeking behavior, including property taxes as the original sin. Land is unique because people do not manufacture it, and its supply, is fixed. A land's value does not come from anything its owner has produced. Its value arises from location, population growth, nearby businesses, transportation systems, schools, public safety, zoning decisions, and other communal investments. It is a type of socially created economic rent: value that an owner can receive through control of a scarce natural opportunity rather than through productive labor.Property taxes are type of harm from their view. Because they combine land and human-made improvements. They mix in a way things you control and don't control in a way that just punishes you for actually using your land and discourages people from building and improving. Buildings, renovations, machinery, and other improvements result from labor and investment. Taxing them raises the cost of construction and effectively penalizes owners for developing as does maintaining, or improving their property. This basically has negative consequences and makes you absorb the costs of other people and subsidize them, basically land speculators are rent seeking and you pay them to speculate and mess the housing market further and speculating more. You absorb the social rent of others unfairly and are incentivized actually to cause urban decay just to live where you are at if you can't speculate.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_Afo1Q6EKEhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sL-qkv7Pzxo
What I find really scare about Georgist policy is that libertarians, Communists, Anarchists and liberals all have reasons to accept it and economoists of even the heterodox schools agree that LVT are effective taxes. The fact that they are politically scare is terrifying to me. Basically, it would unravel a lot of elite political ventures like US, UK and Canadian subsides for the elderly via support for their rent seeking housing behavior. It also threatens business arrangements that often purposly involve renting out very large spaces rather than more efficient methods.Here are some materials showing this from different anglles academically.https://www.cato.org/multimedia/cato-podcast/bad-ways-improve-housing-affordabilityhttps://elucidations.vercel.app/posts/episode-152/https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/podcast/this-week-in-business/rethinking-urban-tax-policy-through-land-value-taxation/https://lewis.ucla.edu/2026/04/22/111-land-value-tax-would-fix-this-with-lars-doucet-incentives-series-pt-11/
>>18681973Libertarians only have reason to accept it in the sense that it is less bad than the status quo. A Georgist tax policy would be significantly better than all the bullshit we have now from property tax, estate tax, income tax, luxury tax, etc. But the premises used to justify LVT are still wrong and the results would still be worse(less efficient) than a taxless society.
>>18681358a rare mega brainletliterally the other way around
>>18681987>a taxless societyNah, the citizen's dividend is fucking awesome.Such a better idea than UBI, which is only memed in the hopes people don't learn about Henry George.
>>18682291Citizen's dividend is again better than the status quo. Better to give the tax revenue back to the people to spend than for the state to spend it. But it still results in a less efficient allocation of resources than not collecting the tax in the first place.
>>18680601>free market capitalism is still the actual best economic system
>>18682296Well while we're at it, money as a standardized and issued legal tender is actually really inefficient too.A perfect society would have no need for it at all.No money, no taxes. Simple.But real life isn't actually that simple, your perfectly smooth platonic solid model of society isn't how it unfolds in the world.Apply a car geared towards maximum efficiency at all costs to the road, and it's going to break down quickly because you took out the seats, chassis and doors to cut down total weight, etc
>>18682306>Well while we're at it, money as a standardized and issued legal tender is actually really inefficient too.>A perfect society would have no need for it at all.>No money, no taxes. Simple.This is incorrect. The economy is a complex, dynamic system and units of indirect exchange make it more efficient.
>>18681973>subsides for the elderly via support for their rent seeking housing behaviorJust for clarification, elderly people don't always live in homes of their own. Should we tax retirement homes? There should be a difference between an old couple buying property and jacking up its values and elderly care homes
>>18682317Okay then, what are you going to use as money?Who issues and guarantees it?Literally anything?How about seashells?You going to do that yourself?anonbucks, redeemable with Carlos for one internets
>>18682320Money could simply be a commodity such as gold or silver. Nobody has to issue gold: people extract it, refine it, and trade it. Private mints could turn it into standardized coins, but the underlying money already exists.Or private banks could issue redeemable notes. A bank might issue a $100 note promising redemption for a specified quantity of gold(or some other asset). Banks would compete on the credibility of their reserves, redemption policies, and reputation. This is essentially the free-banking model.Mutual-credit systems could issue currency without conventional reserves. Members could extend credit to one another, with the currency representing a network of reciprocal obligations rather than a pile of commodity reserves.Cryptocurrencies or other digital bearer assets could function as money. In that case, issuance might be governed by software rather than by an issuer exercising discretionary monetary policy.You may ask what would prevent private currency issuers from simply printing unlimited quantities? The answer is essentially competition and redemption. If Bank A issues claims supposedly redeemable for gold but issues far more claims than it can honor, customers can demand redemption or abandon Bank A for Bank B. That creates a market discipline analogous to a bank run.
>>18682331For such a complex system, having multiple competing and mutually incompatible currencies sounds like not only an exchange nightmare and source of conflict.Like, your company store bucks are no good if you leave town man.
>>18682337Currencies would compete on acceptability, stability, convertibility, and convenience. A currency accepted only by one store would be highly limited; a currency accepted by millions of people and easily exchanged elsewhere would be much more useful.We already deal with multiple currencies without issue. A traveler can exchange dollars for euros, yen, or pesos because financial institutions provide the conversion infrastructure. There is no reason to think that function disappears without state issued money. In fact, currency exchanges, payment networks, banks, and clearinghouses would themselves be competitive businesses.And there's no requirement that every currency be mutually incompatible. They could be denominated in common units, freely convertible, or even effectively interchangeable through private payment networks.
>>18682361In the early US under Articles or Confederation, each state having their own currency was a big problem.
>>18682850Do you know why it was a problem? States issued currency that they couldn't back up except with violence. They passed laws that you could be convicted without a jury if you refused to accept their currency at face value. Since the states issued bullshit, the people preferred full-bodied coin and convertible bank liabilities. It wasn't an issue of too many currencies, it was yet again an issue of state interference.
>>18682887This wouldn’t even be a problem if there was just one standardized currency.
>>18682942There is nothing about a solitary, standardized currency that necessitates it be a good currency. If the state controls the money supply then they can distort the market by taxing savings(money printing). In a free market, good currencies will win out over bad currencies.
>>18680814Fuck off pencilslopper
>>18680812You can literally go help vulnerable citizens today. But you won't, you will vote to force other people to pay so you can feel like you did the right thing. Other people meanwhile pay the price.
>>18682305Any argument?
>>18682319Of course. We are talking property taxes aimed at one group of people and then housing-related tax subsidies for older homeowners that include senior homestead exemptions, property-tax credits, assessment freezes, tax-rate reductions, and property-tax deferrals.
>>18680822This is just not true as I'm also active here and not Indian
>>18684037I got too much shit going on to help vulnerable citizens, but someone has to
