Tuesday, May 11, 2010

How I feel

I feel like I've been kicked for 13 years, and I've just seen the kicker break his foot.


Can't remember my moniker said...

Hopefully the kicker has suffered something more serious than a broken foot, AC1. A slow terminal complaint is my prognosis.

BTW I replied on GF to someone who purported to be you today on GF - Markets Like the Change Coalition. But I had my doubts. Your doppelganger can be rather devious and ambiguous which is, in a way, rather complimentary.

AntiCitizenOne said...

It was me.

IMHO All non-reciprocal income is rent-seeking.

I think the LVT=>Citizens Dividend is reciprocal as you are paying that person for the right to exclude them from your property, in general the welfare state set-up is non-reciprocal.

Can't remember my moniker said...

Thank you for that clarification. I re-calibrate. If I have understood you correctly, the Labour government increased the oppression of UK citizens, as a deliberate act, in order to protect the (more important?) rent seekers with whom they have been in league. My observation about having the underside of my car inspected with mirrors was, presumably, just one aspect of this?

I have some worries over LVT/Citizens Dividend which appears to act detrimentally upon the elderly and the thrifty who own their own property upon a reduced income. An upward movement in their local property values will not be mitigated by any increase in CD which remains constant. I can see the sense in corporate/multinational business, particularly extraction industries. There seems to be a danger to unspoiled areas, mountainous, forested or water bound which all play their part in our ecological balance.

Although interesting, I have to admit that this is not my natural subject area and I have difficulty in anticipating how values will be maintained or changed under such a system. Also the issue of who is a citizen. Someone who has only lived here for two years? (EU - Treaty of Rome). Someone granted citizenship under an amnesty? The devil is in the detail.

Any pointers would be appreciated.

AntiCitizenOne said...

The CD is directly funded by the LVT so the median property is always affordable.

Also as no income is taxed, the returns on investment will rise.

Both should help the elderly.

Can't remember my moniker said...

Under CD, surely rights would have to be made non-assignable, otherwise its introduction would simply create a new class of rent seeker (e.g. as with carbon trading).

AntiCitizenOne said...

Yes. The CD replaces benefits and is payable to the individual and cannot be transferred, although it is their money so they can direct it any way they like.

Can't remember my moniker said...

1. Have tried to read around the subject more, in between travels. The LVT appears to come in different flavours but must surely be based on free market values. MVA and having all the data on computer appears to make that aspect relatively easy to set up and maintain. Are you suggesting a Georgism, Lib Dem, Liberal or Hong Kong/Alaska approach?
2. Whilst agreeing with you that CD should be non-assignable, it appears uncomfortably anti free market to take such position, especially in contrast to LVT if my assumption above is correct. Philosophical dilemma.
3. I presume you are against copyright/patent being held ad infinitum by the expedient of vesting it in a corporation. It is my opinion that the valid objective of offering some protection to authorship has become badly skewed.

Can't remember my moniker said...

A & HR (in response)

#1 faster than UK, due to newer infrastructure.
#2 there are problems but, for most incomers who learn the ropes, it is nothing near as bad as UK.
#3 most of the Islamics left. they tend to work as cheap labour, but since they are doing this under their own steam, and for their own profit, they are the better ones. i have not seen any prayer mats (which i have on the hard shoulder of the M1)

Can't remember my moniker said...

Hi AC1. I have responded to you on "GF: Do We Really Need the VAT Hike?"

I did level one criticism at you regarding your not responding to my comment 7 June 2010 above. As you will see, if you read my response, I am not hostile to the idea but require convincing, as any reasonable person should do.

Sometimes it is hard to get an idea across, the more particularly if it requires a large degree of change. I wonder if Georgists spend more time talking to themselves than trying to spread their message? I have posted some basic links as a primer. Best wishes.