Yes. George never claimed to be original-- he was just the most
ariculate and popular spokesman for this view which was supported by
the French Physiocrats, and to someextent enen by Smith and Riccardo.
Actually, Tom Paine went even further than George, and his ideas are
perhaps even more harmonious with modern Geonomists like Jeffery Smith.
Caspar Davis
At 9:40 PM -0800 12/31/98, Tom Walker wrote:
>This is very similar to Thomas Paine's proposal in his Agrarian
>Justice and
>reflects the principal political commandment of the Old Testament -- the
>"Sabbath of the Land".
>
>>> The author asks, "What is the relationship between equity and economic
>>> growth?" This is the central question asked by Henry George 120 years
>>> ago in Progress and Poverty. His answer was that all livelihood
>>> ultimately depended upon access to land (in which he included all
>>> natural resources, and ALSO such things as government-created
>>> monopolies (i.e. things like salt in Gandhi's India, taxi cab licences,
>>> radio and TV licences, and all patents). Where those resources, which
>>> were provided by nature as commons for the good of all, are held in a
>>> few hands, the holders of them can and do claim all the value of both
>>> labour AND capital, leaving the labourer or ordinary businessperson no
>>> more than they need for elementary subsistence. George's answer was for
>>> society to charge those who benefitted from the exclusive use of land
>>> or any other part of the commons the full economic rent therefore, and
>>> to distribute the rent equally to all so that all might benefit.
>
>
>Tom Walker
>http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
