Chris, I pointed out the problem. As Georgists are against all kinds of privilege, but particularly oppose the most important privilege of all, the legal right to force people to pay for the right to work, I have no idea what you are talking about.
Some left wingers can see the cat. This is Palast interviewing Stiglitz -- a left-wing get-together: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ So then I turned on Stiglitz. OK, Mr Smart-Guy Professor, how would you help developing nations? Stiglitz proposed radical land reform, an attack at the heart of "landlordism," on the usurious rents charged by the propertied oligarchies worldwide, typically 50% of a tenant's crops. So I had to ask the professor: as you were top economist at the World Bank, why didn't the Bank follow your advice? "If you challenge [land ownership], that would be a change in the power of the elites. That's not high on their agenda." \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ This points to why Georgists have had such a hard time. They are attacking the heart of privilege. This is why Land has been read out of the economists' lexicon as a separate function (it is now part of capital). It is why Rent is no longer a return to land. It has been diluted into a return to a number of things. You should read "The Corruption of Economics" by Mason Gaffney to see how it was done. It led to the Land bubble becoming a "housing bubble". Improvements did not bubble, it was land that was bubbling. Land-values are the reason for bank failures. Once, the prudent banker (an oxymoron these days) would never accept land as collateral, for land values were too volatile. If you came to the bank with some land and wanted to build a home, the bank would advance (say) 80% of the cost and use the home as collateral. This protected the bank in the event of trouble. Under political pressure (and greed), banks advanced more and more until home loans approached 100% of land plus improvement. Land prices in normal times, whatever they are, became greater than the prices of improvement. An Australian study found that 65% of the cost of a home was land-value. This meant that bank collateral was mostly volatile land-value. When land-values collapsed and foreclosures began to take place, banks got back much less than they had advanced. The sub-prime loans further stirred up the mess and took the lid off the financial pot. It was not the financial collapse: it was a land-value collapse -- as it always is. The financial skullduggery was exposed after the depression was well under way. The only hope for a quick move out of the present depression (you will notice how politicians and economists refuse to recognize that this is a depression) is for land prices to collapse, thus allowing the economy to thrive. As it is, political policies seem more inclined to prop up land prices, for which I do not blame them. Allowing land prices to drop is not good for re-election chances. Japan has suffered more than a dozen years of stagnation since their land-value collapse. I can see the same thing happening to us. Harry ******************************** Henry George School of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 9104 818 352-4141 ******************************** -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Christoph Reuss Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 5:29 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: paper on technology manias and gullibility P.S.: I find it quite disappointing that Harry, as a Georgist, defends the land MARKET racket, as if that would be the natural state of things. Henry George must be spinning in his grave! Chris _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
