Class and Race Viewed through a Land Lens
A sweeping overview of centuries of the land problem from England to the United States, its impact on class and race, and how this is relevant to wealth inequality and other social problems today.
View powerpoint
A MORE STEALTHY GEORGIST CAT
The Georgist cat is small and lean
And often doesn’t get to be seen.
It hides in the branches of an economic’s-tree
So it takes a long while for you or for me,
To appreciate its cute and original form
That the landlords are so ready to scorn.
The economic’s-tree has many fine branches
(On which we contend, there are no free-lunches).
Whilst the land-owning rich in the city all claim
As bloated capitalists, that they’re not to blame
For the gap that lays ‘twixt the poor and the wealthy,
But oppose any tax to make our nation healthy.
Have you heard the tale of a committee, that
Thought to bell and get warning of a fat cat?
But could not find a soul to apply this device,
Because typically all were a council of mice!
Our Georgist cat has a bell ready-fitted,
(Which makes this analogy more to be pitted).
This warning sound makes our ideals unwanted,
For a new tax is how politicians get doubted.
So the Georgist cat fails to catch any mice
That pose as landlords, along with their vice.
But how shall we silence the bell’s warning sound
And quieten the news that our pussy’s around?
Our Georgist feline is in serious error,
‘Cause its bell draws attention not only to whether
Valuable sites can be ethically shared,
But also the rent from a site is declared
As the means to replace other kinds of taxation,
Which obviously causes the landlords vexation.
In the economic’s tree many other beasts lurk
But are missed, after learning of Henry G’s quirk
Through the cat-finder’s recently brilliant discovery.
This writer seeks a new means for recovery
From our politi-unacceptable claim,
And stealthily project LVT once again.
If we would but examine some more of the tree
Alternatives are waiting there for us to see.
Among them is hiding a far better way
For an equivalent LVT effect, to stay
In essence, without causing such evil offences
To the landlords and their partitioning fences.
When a property-owner decides to sell–quick
The gov’ment buys its land, and not the public!
Its occupant then leases it for a similar fee
To the One-Tax of Henry George’s decree.
Any buildings on-site should be sold as previously
But without the land, on which the price grievously
Had risen, with huge speculation in its advance
That stopped entrepreneurs from having a chance.
The cost of this land must be raised through new bonds
Which the government sells and the public responds,
‘Though their interest-rate’s a bit lower than rent,
Their returns are more stable than the average tenant!
This process will take many years to complete–
So its financial support is no great money feat.
After the lease-fees begin to collect,
Gov’ments can tax less, and firmly expect
To pursue this policy without change, until
All the lease-fees are site-rents in the Gov’ment’s till.
With the land properly shared, the government sees
That site development stays with the current leasees.
Other taxes that cause so much trouble and hate
Are scrapped, with great pleasure to all in the state,
Except for some bankers and the tax collectors
Whose actions no longer apply in these sectors.
Land-rights will be shared through this simple device,
By a fast-growing country that takes our advice.
There was bound to be a negative reaction by the landowners after Henry George proposed a Single Tax on Land Values. It naturally would seem to them that what previously was theirs, was now to be used to provide the means for everybody else to avoid paying taxes, and for their ability to gain from getting a full wage for their labour and for the purchase some useful kind of product to have some support passed on for helping the whole community. . The way of capitalist thinking had already been extended by John Bates Clark, to encourage the landowners to behave as if they were capitalists, because the land would seem to be a similar factor in production as was durable capital goods. Yet he way that the value of land and useful sites of it can grow and changes is nothing like how a decent item of durable capital goods does change in value over time. The value of the site of land rises as the region becomes better developed and grows, whilst the value the item of durable goods slowly decreases due of its need for maintenance being spent on it and its depreciation as it become obsolescent. So in order to express the need for better legislation for sharing the natural opportunities, George was forced to introduce an appeal to our ethical standards,
and as we well know from how business is done, that ethics take a back-seat when the gainfulness’ of money investments is being challenged.
The above poem suggests that there is an alternative way for the conversion this return to ethical behaviour by the landowners, when they discover that as business-men and women they can invest in the durable capital goods and do more to help the growth of society that were their sites simply waiting for an eventual greater value. They would find that by selling them to the government, this action will immediately provide some investment capital to make the third factor of Adam Smith’s production functions, rather than when the opportunities of the site is being hoarded and kept unused.Yet they are blind as the mice in the nursery rhyme for no Georgist farmer’s wife is able to cut off their tails! No carving knife is going to find political strength so long as their ignorance for the power to exchange one kind of benefit for another that will bring a safer and more stable national economy to our social system.