tcpip | Ignorance, Gillard PM, Holidays Approach, Gaming Reviews

Ignorance, Gillard PM, Holidays Approach, Gaming Reviews

Most regular readers will know I'm an advocate of land tax as a replace for inefficient and unproductive taxes on labour and capital. On a whim, I entered this discussion on a property investment website. Enjoy the results. What I find particularly remarkable is their ignorance of basic economics (like the Law of Rent or the distinction between land and capital) on matters they claim expertise in. Actually I must confess I find this a lot; often people with a strong opinion on a topic like to think they're an expert on a topic. Personally, I prefer to form a strong opinion by reaching "deeply considered convictions", based on reason and evidence, rather than having "deeply ingrained prejudices" from emotions and assumptions.

Julia Gillard became the first ever female Prime Minister of Australia yesterday (that's only taken over one hundred years, *grumble*). It's an acting position whilst Rudd is in Bali (finally a PM who's acting on climate change!) , and one which seems to attract a share of odd events. I've sent her a congratulatory email (the last email conversation we had was a little terse; I was writing on behalf of Labor for Refugees and she was shadow minister for immigration).

Speaking of which, for the second year in a row, I'm desparately trying to organise tickets to Bali again over the break. I've contacted Flight Centre, and they've sent an email confirmation saying their processing the request, but no confirmation yet. Meh. It's been years since I've been to the archipelago, and I really want to see it again. New Zealand is not an option this summer (I think I'll go south for winter). If this doesn't work out for whatever reason maybe a visit to Tasmania is in order; it's been a while since I've seen Murdoch's former Vice-Chancellor, Professor Peter Boyce and we remain in irregular correspondence.

This week I finally managed to finish my review of Earthdawn: Gamemaster's Compendium; it's a huge, stunning book and quite good on the substance level as well. Not so good is the old AD&D module D1: Descent into the Depths of the Earth, which is seriously lacking in style, substance and a purpose for existence. Played another session of Legend of the Five Rings last Sunday with a refitted AD&D Oriental Adventures module. It's going very well, if only I can hack out some overall narrative to the various instances of character development and plot leads.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

o.k. it's clear you aren't interested in an intelligent conversation on this topic.

You're right - zoning is a tax on capital/ labour, but it also functions as a tax on the land, insofar as I can't voluntarily convert the use, right? We all know that zoning is economically inefficient, and in a perfect marketplace it would be completely unnecessary, right? But I have yet to find said perfect marketplace.

This, I think, is the core of the forum denizens' argument, really -- the academic theory won't always translate perfectly into the 'real world' because you can't usually control the existing externalities.

But I still find the idea of investors ignorant of basic economic principles to be amazing -- do they realize that money is essentially a fiction?

Anti-intellectualism is a rampant and destructive mental disorder which has become increasingly prevalent among both the fundamental theologians and the vulgar materialists. In both cases understanding the world has become too difficult to understand and their own lack of humility does not allow them to consider the possibility that on a certain subject, someone else may have a better answer.

Military adventures aside, the period of the Clinton presidency did include a number of positives for the domestic poor. Examples include: increasing the top rate of income taxation and corporate taxation; raising the tax-free status for a number low-level capital gains; raising the minimum wage; breaking up the television and radio oligopolies; introducing leave with job security for pregnancies or serious injuries.

One the negative, one could include the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1997 (which Clinton vetoed twice).

Overall, one would certainly prefer to be a poor person under Clinton's government than those that preceded or followed him.

You're right - zoning is a tax on capital/ labour, but it also functions as a tax on the land, insofar as I can't voluntarily convert the use, right?

No, land tax is based on the unimproved value only. Zoning, if you like, is an absolute tax on certain types of capital and labour investment on that land.

But I still find the idea of investors ignorant of basic economic principles to be amazing -- do they realize that money is essentially a fiction?

Well I did try to alert them to that with the reference to the Asian Financial Crisis. All the monetary increases in the world doesn't mean squat if there isn't the increases in productivity to back it up.

Maybe they think they'll be richer if they just printed more money :-)

No, land tax is based on the unimproved value only. Zoning, if you like, is an absolute tax on certain types of capital and labour investment on that land.

I guess that's true, but isn't the 'unimproved' value based in part on the potential uses to which the land can be put? (i.e. not all land is created equal-- some of it is on navigable rivers, some of it is arid and unfarmable, some of it is on top of a mountain.)

so even absent the externality represented by zoning or other land use related structures, not all land has equal absolute value (i.e. not all land can be put to all uses), right? And the unimproved value must take this into account somehow, right? Isn't zoning merely an artificial extension of the reality that land isn't really 100% fungible?

Obviously the alternative is that all land is taxed at an equal rate per unit area, which would seem somewhat far-fetched, as it ignores the real scarcity issue. I certainly didn't understand the Land Tax issue this way -- it appeared to take into account the potential that the land had, without actually taxing any improvements constructed on the property. This would seem to go along with your argument -- that keeping otherwise valuable land vacant is expensive, while improving said land makes it effectively cheaper (as it would be taxed at the same rate, regardless of whether it actually produces anything -- thus giving incentive to use it for its highest and best use, right?)

But I guess you're right -- the zoning acts to make the relative cost of converting the land to a 'non-conforming use' more expensive... not the land itself :-)

This is an interesting topic. Thanks!

Heh. That was the argument I was using heavily in 2001-2 on aus.politics, but, you need to remember that they're not only selfish, but, they're arseholes too. They're quite happy to spend far in excess if it means they can punish people less fortunate.

The myopic selfishness is really breath taking.

And even when it was explained to him he still didn't get it.. :(

For all the rates and land tax I pay I only get one state vote and one local council vote.

Yeah, and governments don't spend more of their time protecting the assets of those with largesse...

I wonder what the poster would have thought about the multiple votes that used to exist in Britian up to the 1940s (e.g., graduates of Oxford University and Cambridge University sent representatives to Parliament).

Good point. I guess if they can't throw their weight around intellectually they can only feel better through some other means...

Shrug. Sorry if pointing out the ongoing domestic housing crisis in your country (and the billions spent on war instead) doesn't count as "intelligent conversation" to you. Were you were hoping for some very generic Republican vs Democrat debate or something?

Yep, as I said, Clinton's priorities were only horribly fucked up as compared to outright evil ;-).

What causes a trailer park isn't the people who end up living there, or even their income or wealth. They're having to bid on what housing exists to be bought or leased and are subject to the laws of supply and demand.

The concept of generations spending their lives living in caravan parks should be shocking to Americans, but, their mainstream media seems so content with the status quo that they merely to use them as the butt of jokes in sitcoms.

The implication being that Hillary is some how lacking in the above qualities.

I'm not going to argue with you whether this or that candidate might have skills or not. It's really quite irrelevant. The fact is, the US system is so insular and undemocratic in practice that more qualified candidates don't get a shot.

Bill Clinton is quite easily the best president the US has had in 30+ years.

So Clinton's the best President there's been since, um, the last time there was a Democrat President? Er, yeah. A bit of a damning assessment, if ever I've heard one ;-).

Additionally. Since when has being elected to public office NOT been anything but a huge popularity contest?

But, you see, it's never been a popularity contest as far as candidature goes. They're judged on the basis of the amount of election fund donations they can raise for the big "Fundraisers". It's essentially a corporate corruption contest: who can put out the most convincingly to corporate lobbyists to get them to sign cheques.

I fail to see how being related to someone who has held high office should in any way disqualify a person from hold said office them self.

Where I fail to see anything special in Hilary Clinton which would make the insular conditions through which she's been thrust into power any less embarrassing.

More substance. Less adjectives.

..but someone else almost always will!

You would think so wouldn't you? :(

We had the multiple voter *here* in municipal elections, according to the value detc of property owned.

Non-owners didn't get to vote.

Some folks (like me @ 52) will remember this, and others will have heard of it.

We'll have to differ there then. To my mind, a political debate must be accessible.

In Australia's local political scene, we had an Opposition Leader called Kim Beazley. Smart guy, likeable on a personal level. But the man simply can't communicate effectively with people with passion in a language everyone can understand.

I can understand how a lack of passion might be a survival trait for American politics, where "the best President in 30+ years" greatest achievement was raising the minimum wage from one extremely low point to merely a very very low point. But all too often, a refusal to use non-jargon is used by academics who prefer to hoard their knowledge away from ordinary folk in an elitist way or by those who use it as a means to not have to grapple with issues ordinary people deal with.

I don't know if either of those apply to you, but, you really ought not be so quick to dismiss other peoples views simply because they use ordinary language you're not used to.

Ah yes, I do remember that...

Also, up until the 1950s in Victoria you had to own land in order to vote in the Legislative Council elections.

I truly hope so.

:-/

A disgrace.

Nothing learned from one economy can be successfully implemented in another.

Yeah, that was a particularly bizarre statement.

And only Australian economists, who are currently working, could hope to make any accurate observations or predictions about even the most fundamental aspects of the Australian economy.

Tragic that I could name some of those as well, eh? And I'm still waiting for ONE contrary argument from an economist...

Because once again the government exists only to the detriment of the citizenry.

I wonder who he'd call if his house was broken into? Or do you suppose he'd form his own vigilante group?

The world would apparently be a much better place if we just had less smart people.

Maybe said poster would feel less threatened ;-)

I'm guessing that the thread only deteriorates into a pointless flame war after these gems.

Actually, most have fled the field once they realised they didn't have an argument.

Well, there was that fellow who decided to try ad hominem but rather failed because you weren't trying to hide you previous work or your position. That's almost like an argument. Sort of.

One would have to be pretty silly to try to hide in a forum and post using their name!

It is interesting that when asked to discuss any of the facts of the material they decided not to contribute anymore.. Oh well.

Good review!

Perhaps they feel the priveleges of citizenship are worth less if those without aren't treated as harshly.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Page 3 of 4

Ignorance, Gillard PM, Holidays Approach, Gaming Reviews

no subject

Re: Some guy named Smith

no subject

no subject

Re: Some guy named Smith

Re: Some guy named Smith

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Re: jatku

Re: jatku

Re: jatku

no subject

no subject