On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 19:23:39 -0500, Publius wrote:
>> Wrong. The market would just be in periodic use rights rather than
>> perpetual ownership rights. You appear to be unaware that there are
>> markets in use rights to land that can't be privately owned and thus
>> has no capital value, like federal range land, community land trust
>> land, etc.
>>
>>>With no
>>>market, there is no way to determine the value,
>>>aside from arbitrary and capricioius bureaucratic
>>>fiat. Reductio ad absurdum. QED. Case closed.
>>>One more utopia shot down.
>>
>> No, you are just ignorant of the relevant economics.
>
> I hate to launch a second thread on this topic, but it is you who are
> ignorant of the relevant economics, as usual. Gummint-owned land will have
> a capital and market value as long as a market exists. The value of a
> particular gummint-owned parcel will be established via comparables, and be
> carried on the gummint's books with that value. When and if the gummint
> ever decides to sell that parcel, it will set a price based on that value.
>
> If all land is owned by the gummint, however, and may not be sold to to
> aqnyone else, then there is no longer a market, and "market values" become
> meaningless.
What total self serving and obviously erroneous bullshit. The enforced
exclusive use of a location is the actual item in question. How that is
done is at issue. The land and the exclusive use do not disappear due to
a lack of perpetuality or outright ownership. As a matter of _**FACT**__
that sort of "ownership" of land is not the current case anyway. If you
do not pay the tax on the land you will lose the exclusive use rights. If
the tax is called a rent then the enforcement will have been done the same
way. There is no more efficient way to do this than through government.
If there were a more efficient mechanism then government would not be
needed and probably would not exist. The method by which land tenure is
enforced is at issue, not the good or evil of actual tenure or the
enforcement. The division and specialization of land and labor is
necessary to support larger populations. It is "assumed" that larger
populations are "good". That is the only "assumption". Land has value in
use. That is the only real value.
--
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers
of society but the people themselves; and
if we think them not enlightened enough to
exercise their control with a wholesome
discretion, the remedy is not to take it from
them, but to inform their discretion by
education." - Thomas Jefferson
http://GreaterVoice.org/extend
