4 ms·
Yes, the labour involved in organising the factory to produce cars is an act, and worth rewarding, but then so is managing a rental property. What I'm talking
by aninhumer 10y ago
Yes, the labour involved in organising the factory to produce cars is an act, and worth rewarding, but then so is managing a rental property.
What I'm talking about simply owning the factory (or perhaps a better example is owning a car company, without managing it yourself).
I'm familiar with Georgism, but I had a similar confusion about land value tax. I just don't see what's so special about land compared to capital goods. I'd rather have a general wealth tax.
- ArkyBeagle 10y agoMaybe it's just me? Georgism is inherently about the proposition that taxing labor rather than rents is inherently immoral. That's rather the point of it. I'd just like to see rents in general taxed rather than labor taxed. The theory of rents provides a means to distinguish between ... "socially useful" wealth and "sort of parasitic" wealth." As you note, there's nothing original about this.
- aninhumer 10y agoWell I'm highly suspicious of arguments that anything in economics is "inherently immoral". I prefer to talk about outcomes. But in any case, I'm not suggesting a labour tax, I'm suggesting a wealth tax. I think my argument is similar to George's: just as LVT encourages efficient use of land, a wealth tax encourages efficient use of wealth in general.