• J Lou@mastodon.socialOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    There is an overlap of principles though. A Georgist basis for common ownership of land and natural resources is a negative application of the labor theory of property. A positive application of the labor theory of property provides an argument for workers’ self-management. See: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/column-the-case-for-employee-owned-companies

    Georgism is 1 policy. Georgism itself leaves doesn’t specify what the rest of the economy looks like

    • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The pivotal question is, supposing I lived in a society in which workers had achieved self management, cooperatives housing, and participatory systems for land allocation, then what additional valuable objective, yet unknown and unrealized, might I discover from Georgism, that I reasonably might wish for my society further to achieve?

      • J Lou@mastodon.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yeah land value taxation. Even if land is cooperatively managed, it is still useful to charge for the usage of land to ensure efficient usage and prevent mismanagement

        • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Does Amazon manage warehouses, and if so, does it charge the warehouse to ensure efficient usage and to prevent mismanagement?

          Despite the differences that Amazon is private and hierarchical, should a different approach, respecting the question, be preferred for a system that is public and lateral?

          Is land tax a practice that was unknown before the emergence of Georgism, or that is supported exclusively by Georgists?

          • J Lou@mastodon.socialOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I meant to ensure socially efficient usage. Not usage that is efficient from the perspective of a private actor. These are not the same thing in many cases, but in particular, it is the case with land due to inelastic supply

            Land value tax is associated with Georgism. I don’t see what the point would be of denying that or trying to avoid association with Georgism

            • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              In both cases, oversight is not contingent on some formalized rule of value transfer.

              It is always possible to review the current circumstances, and simply to make a suitable decision.