1
2
3
Wealth and Want | |||||||
... because democracy alone is not enough to produce widely shared prosperity. | |||||||
Home | Essential Documents | Themes | All Documents | Authors | Glossary | Links | Contact Us |
Givings
I. Historical overview Jeff Smith: How Profit Shapes Urban
SpaceII. The problem of sprawl III. Affordable and efficient public transport IV. Agricultural benefits V. Financial concerns VI. Conclusion: A greater perspective Appendix: "Natural Capitalism" -- A Case Study in Blindness to Land Value Taxation But LVT has much more to contribute to the question of low-impact urban function, in the form of affordable and efficient public transport and other desirable infrastructure. The principle reason why public transport options are presently so limited is because the taxpayer-funded investment in this and other forms of infrastructure effectively disappears, in an almost unseen manner, into the "Black Hole" of landowners' pockets. That is, not only is the resulting compact cityscape more amenable to the provision of public transport (not to mention walking and riding), but LVT makes the investment in such infrastructure affordable because the resulting enhanced land values are "recycled" back into public coffers. The extension of London's Jubilee line underground network, which opened in 1999, provides a good case in point of how desirable infrastructure can be self-funding if land values are recaptured. An independent study was performed which assessed the increase in land values extending to 800 yards from each of the 10 stations. The accumulated gain (to private landowners) was estimated to be around £13 billion, courtesy of the £3.5 billion of taxpayers funds it took to build the line! ... A simple model will serve to illustrate. Presently, rail/metro infrastructure is almost prohibitively expensive because the windfall benefits are effectively handed over to landowners. To partially recoup the outlay, authorities are forced to set fares so high as to act as a disincentive to potential low-impact commuters. read the entire article
Although society may have a feeble claim to many
of the things it taxes, land value is precisely what
society should not forgo. It’s not lone owners but
the community who generates this value by its
infrastructure and its mere presence. Leaving ground rent
uncollected constitutes a "giving" that communities and
eco-systems can ill afford. Let's wean owners from
socially-generated site values and make urgent their
hunger, and they'll hunt up their own built value where
it's needed. ...
Read the whole
article
Jeff Smith: What the Left Must Do: Share the Surplus
The much and justifiably
criticized corporation is in essence its corporate
charter, given value by limiting the
liability of managers, directors, and
investors. It’s worth at least the
cost of the insurance payments not made by the
corporation, which would equal the costs imposed upon
worker, customer, and nature. As the “need”
arises, legislatures extend limited liability even
further: Congress legally lowered the greater risk of
nuclear power to benefit Westinghouse, of the Valdez oil
transport spill for Exxon, and the Y2K software design
bug for Microsoft. Politicians define
legally “safe” amounts of polluted air and
water for GM and Monsanto, keeping safe the wealth of
those responsible.
Not to be outdone by any legislature, the Supreme Court has ruled in favour of compensating landowners for environmental “takings”, but has remained silent about landowners compensating the public for any “givings”, as when site values skyrocket near a new light rail stop. Molly Ivins wrote,
"Henry George must be in his grave spinning' like
a cyclotron. We, the people at large, make the land more
desirable; and then the landowners want us to pay them
because we won't allow them to poison the air or to
pollute the rivers." (1995 March)
That’s how great fortunes are made: by
sloughing off private costs (which become “negative
externalities”) while soaking up public benefits
(some “positive externalities”). Land titles,
corporate charters, and other privileges – mere
pieces of paper – are worth trillions each year.
The corporations – from the Federal Reserve to
Exxon (both founded by the “oiligarchy”)
– that receive these privileges make their owners
rich or richer. Their wealth is not compensation for the
exertions of either labor or capital, not profit in the
market from output, but rent from present lobbying of
legislatures or past conquest of others’ lands.
Thus laws (“privilege” means “private
law”) funnel multi-trillions of dollars each year
from the many to the few. ...
Read the whole
article
|
|
to email this page to a friend: right click, choose
"send"
|
||||||
Wealth and Want
|
www.wealthandwant.com
|
|||||
... because democracy alone hasn't yet led to a society
in which all can prosper
|