▲ 7 ▼ The Power of Land: Georgism 101 (mastodon.social) submitted 2 years ago by jlou@mastodon.social to c/leftism@lemmy.world 32 comments fedilink hide all child comments The Power of Land: Georgism 101 https://youtu.be/smi_iIoKybg Discusses importance of common ownership of land and natural resources @leftism
[–] PizzaMan@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) If you're not going to answer my questions that I don't see the need to respond to your statements. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) Are you referring to your question about my ideals or values, respecting distribution of benefit from land usage? I have framed the conversation around my skepticism that Georgism meaningfully contributes to leftism or functions as a leftist tendency. I feel the general subject is not bound to my personal feelings or preferences. Certainly, my characterization is that any movements or values are credibly leftist only if they at least express skepticism over any particular assets or resources, including lands, being utilized socially and also toward benefit that is private. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PizzaMan@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Are you referring to your question about my ideals or values, respecting distribution of benefit from land usage? I'm referring to this one: ideal that land is natural and should benefit everyone equally. Do you disagree with this? I have framed the conversation around my skepticism that Georgism meaningfully contributes to leftism or functions as a leftist tendency The goal of leftism is to create a better, more progressive society. With that means that the "end goal" of the state must be determined, which means the income, whether monetary/resource based/etc must be determined as well. You can't have a state that doesn't have a defined input/output. So if you want to meaningfully contribute to an ideal leftist society/government, one such meaningful contribution is solving the government's input/output problem. Taxing land is one such solution to this problem. including lands, being utilized socially and also toward benefit that is private. Under georgism, all land gets taxed regardless of who owns the land, how they own the land, whether it is private or personal, and regardless of whether or not private property still exists. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) It is meaningless to assert as an objective simply creating a society that is "better". Further, not all leftists defend land commodification. Not all leftists defend markets. Not all leftists defend money. Not all leftists defend the state. Final objectives are less valuable than criticism of structure and strategies for transformation. As I have suggested, by my own characterization at least, the entry point for leftism is criticism of the class structure of society, embodied in the social construct of private property, that is, particular resources or assets being utilized socially but controlled privately. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PizzaMan@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Can you answer my question or not? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* The topic of discussion is Georgism, and its relation to leftism. I did address the general sense of your question, in relation to such a context. Would you explain why such a contribution seems to you as inadequate? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) Are you referring to your question about my ideals or values, respecting distribution of benefit from land usage? I have framed the conversation around my skepticism that Georgism meaningfully contributes to leftism or functions as a leftist tendency. I feel the general subject is not bound to my personal feelings or preferences. Certainly, my characterization is that any movements or values are credibly leftist only if they at least express skepticism over any particular assets or resources, including lands, being utilized socially and also toward benefit that is private. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PizzaMan@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Are you referring to your question about my ideals or values, respecting distribution of benefit from land usage? I'm referring to this one: ideal that land is natural and should benefit everyone equally. Do you disagree with this? I have framed the conversation around my skepticism that Georgism meaningfully contributes to leftism or functions as a leftist tendency The goal of leftism is to create a better, more progressive society. With that means that the "end goal" of the state must be determined, which means the income, whether monetary/resource based/etc must be determined as well. You can't have a state that doesn't have a defined input/output. So if you want to meaningfully contribute to an ideal leftist society/government, one such meaningful contribution is solving the government's input/output problem. Taxing land is one such solution to this problem. including lands, being utilized socially and also toward benefit that is private. Under georgism, all land gets taxed regardless of who owns the land, how they own the land, whether it is private or personal, and regardless of whether or not private property still exists. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) It is meaningless to assert as an objective simply creating a society that is "better". Further, not all leftists defend land commodification. Not all leftists defend markets. Not all leftists defend money. Not all leftists defend the state. Final objectives are less valuable than criticism of structure and strategies for transformation. As I have suggested, by my own characterization at least, the entry point for leftism is criticism of the class structure of society, embodied in the social construct of private property, that is, particular resources or assets being utilized socially but controlled privately. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PizzaMan@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Can you answer my question or not? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* The topic of discussion is Georgism, and its relation to leftism. I did address the general sense of your question, in relation to such a context. Would you explain why such a contribution seems to you as inadequate? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] PizzaMan@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Are you referring to your question about my ideals or values, respecting distribution of benefit from land usage? I'm referring to this one: ideal that land is natural and should benefit everyone equally. Do you disagree with this? I have framed the conversation around my skepticism that Georgism meaningfully contributes to leftism or functions as a leftist tendency The goal of leftism is to create a better, more progressive society. With that means that the "end goal" of the state must be determined, which means the income, whether monetary/resource based/etc must be determined as well. You can't have a state that doesn't have a defined input/output. So if you want to meaningfully contribute to an ideal leftist society/government, one such meaningful contribution is solving the government's input/output problem. Taxing land is one such solution to this problem. including lands, being utilized socially and also toward benefit that is private. Under georgism, all land gets taxed regardless of who owns the land, how they own the land, whether it is private or personal, and regardless of whether or not private property still exists. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) It is meaningless to assert as an objective simply creating a society that is "better". Further, not all leftists defend land commodification. Not all leftists defend markets. Not all leftists defend money. Not all leftists defend the state. Final objectives are less valuable than criticism of structure and strategies for transformation. As I have suggested, by my own characterization at least, the entry point for leftism is criticism of the class structure of society, embodied in the social construct of private property, that is, particular resources or assets being utilized socially but controlled privately. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PizzaMan@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Can you answer my question or not? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* The topic of discussion is Georgism, and its relation to leftism. I did address the general sense of your question, in relation to such a context. Would you explain why such a contribution seems to you as inadequate? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) It is meaningless to assert as an objective simply creating a society that is "better". Further, not all leftists defend land commodification. Not all leftists defend markets. Not all leftists defend money. Not all leftists defend the state. Final objectives are less valuable than criticism of structure and strategies for transformation. As I have suggested, by my own characterization at least, the entry point for leftism is criticism of the class structure of society, embodied in the social construct of private property, that is, particular resources or assets being utilized socially but controlled privately. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PizzaMan@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Can you answer my question or not? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* The topic of discussion is Georgism, and its relation to leftism. I did address the general sense of your question, in relation to such a context. Would you explain why such a contribution seems to you as inadequate? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] PizzaMan@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Can you answer my question or not? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* The topic of discussion is Georgism, and its relation to leftism. I did address the general sense of your question, in relation to such a context. Would you explain why such a contribution seems to you as inadequate? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* The topic of discussion is Georgism, and its relation to leftism. I did address the general sense of your question, in relation to such a context. Would you explain why such a contribution seems to you as inadequate? permalink fedilink source parent