--- Brian Holtz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > One of my strongest reservations about my recent > conversion to hardcore geolibertarianism is why it > doesn't have higher mindshare among libertarian > intellectuals.
Most libertarians just have not been exposed to it. Most libertarian intellectuals who have heard of Henry George only know about land-value taxation through the false picture of it painted by Rothbard. Libertarian opponents to geolibertarianism ususally point to Rothbards, such as in his Man, Economy, and State, without realizing this false description has been rebutted (the book Critics of Henry George), and the rebuttal has not been responded to. Leading geolibertarians have included Hess and Nolan. A recent convert to geolibertarianism is Prof. Dan Klein, now at George Mason University. Many free-market economists agree with the late Milton Friedman that public revenue from land is the best or least-worst source of public revenue. It's standard economics that the deadweight loss of taxation is zero for fixed supplies such as land. Some libertarians are just opposed to the state and to taxation, and closed-mindedly refuse to even consider reforms within a limited government. In my experience, it is relatively easy to convert economists such as Dan Klein to geolibertarianism, and relatively difficult to convert academic philosophers, who (except for John Hospers) often don't understand basic economics and refuse to learn. Fred Foldvary
