Georgists rise up!

I was about to ask, is this person a Georgist lol?

There are dozens of us!

checks comment history, sees /r/neoliberal, nods in approval

What’s a Georgist?

Yes cutting taxes on the rich and corporations is a great way to increase revenue. /s

About 10 years ago the State of Kansas elected Sam Brownback as governor. He was a Koch operative who cut taxes so much that things got so bad in Kansas they pretty much ran him out of the state and elected a democrat. Naturally he was able to find a home in the Trump regime.

Yep the Great Republican Experiment. It was supposed to be a conservative paradise, but they went tits up in the first few years. It's a great example of why conservative policies don't work.

I too enjoy r/neoliberal but I haven't really looked into LVT that much. Any suggestions on what I should read to learn more about it? Besides the "just tax land lol" meme.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism

It's very popular on r/neoliberal. I don't know too much about it though.

Georgism

>Georgism, also called in modern times Geoism, and known historically as the single tax movement, is an economic ideology holding that, although people should own the value they produce themselves, the economic rent derived from land—including from all natural resources, the commons, and urban locations—should belong equally to all members of society. Developed from the writings of American economist and social reformer Henry George, the Georgist paradigm seeks solutions to social and ecological problems, based on principles of land rights and public finance which attempt to integrate economic efficiency with social justice.

^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)

Back to the DT you degenerates!

No thanks.

Neoliberalism is fine with fascism so no thanks.

An obscure but quite influential school of economic thought stemming from Henry George, a major American economist from the late 19th century. Essentially, he advocated a tax on land value instead of income or property and was a heavy advocate of free trade.

Thanks I feel kinda dumb for never hearing about this.

The part about the people owning what they produce doesn’t seem bad. It seems to be Marx-adjacent.

Don't! Most people haven't, he was influential but there aren't many strict devotees of his work so it's not as well known.

Fun Fact: The only large place where traditional Georgist concepts have been implemented in a major way is Taiwan, as Sun-Yat Sen(Nationalist leader and the founding father of modern China to both the PRC and Taiwan) was a convert to Georgist economics.

I’m going to have to look into it more thanks. It seems decent in that the people who generate value get a portion of it, unless that’s just a red herring?

Yes and no, in practice his work was the first big way to "fix" capitalism. Quite a few of his ideas are interesting, but they have gotten picked up by a number of capitalists as a reason to cut income taxes, and an attempt to undercut the appeal of socialism. Like in the OP the article has the guy basically just advocating general tax cuts(which isn't Erie's problem, I live here and wages are awful). There are both Left and Right strains of Georgism.

Him and Marx were actually contemporaries for a bit: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1881/letters/81_06_20.htm

I think the Erie area is the only part of the commonwealth I’ve yet to visit.

Fun during the Spring+Summer, not missing a ton but Presque Isle is nice as are fresh pepperoni balls(local treat)

I vaguely remember the city of Allentown doing a land tax.

In general are there a lot of lake activities? I live close to Sunbury there is some Susquehanna River stuff to do but not as much as people think.

Depends on your definition of a lot, Presque Isle is a decently sized state park with a ton of visitors, theres also a whole marina part of the city to walk, a water park, and the tom ridge environmental center. In North East(a town North East of Erie) it's like a mini wine country.

Lol, touch grass

It’s explained in the article but you’d have to read it to find out

The URL goerie even looked like George at first glance

Raising taxes on land would encourage development of vacant lots and abandoned buildings.

Yeah, for sure, let's keep cutting the taxes so that roadwork and public safety goes out the window. If you cut enough, there won't even be enough to fund the tax collection process!

The same folks who have "No farms, no food" as a bumper sticker want to stick it to the farmer... go figure.

If I produce income (on which I am taxed) and I buy land with that income, am I not owning the value of what I have produced? Why should I be taxed a second time on that?

Some places have a "land tax" that they then use to purchase land for the public or for conservation easements to preserve open land.

Did you make the land?

LERTA, imho, is corporate welfare best to be avoided.

I think it’s moving taxes not reducing them. So the landowner sitting on a dead factory needs to pay taxes on it, so they’d be more likely to either build something or sell it to someone who will build something.

The land is not the product. Rather, the land is purchased with the product I make (income which is taxed), so I should not face a double tax on what is mine.

>So the landowner sitting on a dead factory needs to pay taxes on it,

In PA, the owner of that land is paying tax on it. Cannot be otherwise under PA assessment law.

Right, so you’d be taxing the land more and the building less. Which is the opposite of what you usually see - put on an addition, your taxes go up.

In most places, where you tax on improvements, the cheapest option might be to sit on an empty lot or dead building because as soon as you put something on it, your taxes go up. That might be risky in a low population area where you might not be able to get staff or customers. But tax the land, then you don’t have as much risk involved.

Yeah, that wasn't Allentown's case. There it was on the land parcel vs. size of building on it to encourage more taxable development.

If you have a home and buy the lot next you and merge them, your taxes still go up. I get the vacant building issue but I also thinks this hurts redevelopment and definitely farmers.

I haven't looked into it much either. Most cities who have tried it are in PA though including Mayor Reed in Harrisburg.

>put on an addition, your taxes go up.

In much of PA, that is not how assessment law works.

There are 2 laws applicable to assessments: the General County Assessment Law at 72 P.S. Sect 5020 and the Consolidated County Assessment Law at 53 Pa. C.S. Sect 8801. The GCA applies only to Philadelphia and Allegheny Counties. All properties in a county must be uniformly assessed regardless of its use as residential or commercial. Beyond that, it gets a bit complicated.

An active business will be taxed more than a vacant building because of the 3-prong approach used in some counties, but there is no allowance for "taxing the land more and the building less." Also, in most counties, putting on an addition will not automatically - if at all - result in your property tax going up. The amount of the assessment can be appealed; indeed, a number of businesses appeal on an annual basis.

The last time I took a deep dive on the assessment issue, a majority of PA counties had not conducted a county wide reassessment for over 20 years. They were still issuing property tax bills based on FY 2000, or earlier! - market values.

Erie (city) has a problem wherein much of its property is owned by non-profit entities that don't pay property taxes. I don't imagine they'd start under this program.

This is the second post in three days about how a city in Pennsylvania can find prosperity by cutting taxes. Makes you think.

But it was a conservative paradise.

Just wait till you hear about ECRDA! We have all this money floating around this city and none of it seems to be going to help the people here...kinda makes a person think.

Socialism for the rich, rigged Individualism for the poor.

Idk why anyone making less than ~$150k/yr votes for conservatives. Basically voting against their own interests

If you don’t mind, what do you mean by uniformly assessed?

You probably need to put something in to protect farmland, otherwise you end up like NJ, where you can’t make a profit and have to sell it to build homes or solar farms or something that isn’t a farm.

But why do you think it hurts redevelopment?

I would rather just have my taxes go down.

People are constantly saying "raise taxes, lower taxes, raise taxes, lower taxes" and I'm over here like "how about we just be more fiscally conscience and keep government accountable?"

Councilmember Pat Toomey was actually instrumental in getting it passed, lol

Probably the only good decision he ever made.

Didn't know this about Erie, but non-profits not paying taxes hurts a lot of cities and towns. They really need to pay property taxes.

In Philly the universities buy land and play developer, then don't have to pay taxes on any of the student housing they develop. It's ridiculous.

Church buildings used for worship can be exempt I guess, that's not worth the 1st amendment fight, but everybody else? Pay up.

Agree.

In a true LVT situation, your income would NOT be taxed, only the Land if you choose to purchase it. So you would not be double taxed.

Make taxes on profits significantly and lower taxes on civilians in tax brackets lower than 200k. Then outlaw stock buybacks and lower job degree requirements. Profit

They should allow the lake to freeze. Allow for amateur hockey to become the lifeblood of the community. Enhance the storefront to be hockey themed. Make everyone play hockey. Cancel school when hockey game is planned. Allow the children to become waiters at diners at age 9

Yeah, ok, property taxes should be slashed on primary residences. It's a huge problem for lower income households and elderly.

You got a second home, or are a landlord, you should be taxed at higher rates for the extra homes. Personal income taxes should be increased for incomes over $150k.

And it's stupid how we fund education through property taxes by districts and not from a general education fund.

The way in which they frame the narrative - shift of tax burden from variable a to variable b, under the hypothetical that it'll push people to utilize their land in such a way that it is implied, will yield profit to either offset or net positive, is both an exaggeration and nonsensical.

Municipalities across the country are providing certain tax abatements, forgiveness, or sliding scale agreements in order to forgo that lump sum of revenue up front for the revenue that comes as a result of reinvestment, for the long term. This also includes changes to Zoning, and possibly codes/ordinances in order to allow for more flexibility with what can be built, in order to be more accessible to more people.

Their hypothetical only works if the buyer actually wants to invest in the community, not a single residential or commercial building, which may sit unaltered as structure or land, thus a loop hole is evident. It also won't work if, again, changes to the area's zoning don't happen because otherwise, if a company views it as an unnecessary hurdle, they won't invest. Plenty of other places, and States, for a business can set up shop. It's also dumb to think they don't have an army of lawyers reviewing these laws to find a way out of it.

It's another bullshit feel good policy they didn't fully flush out because they chose to lick boots rather than make simple changes to their ordinances, which would have allowed for the same thing, but with little to no freebees

The good old persons network has been operating like this for YEARS in Erie.

Last I heard it was 46% of value in Erie was not taxable.

The figure seems to vary a bit, depending on who's telling it, but I'd agree.

LERTA only works to an extent. How often is the land sold? That's when you make the revenue. Say a developer buys the land. They pay the tax 1 time. In 10 years when they will start owing property tax, they will sell the property to the tenant and move on. If the tenant is smart, they too move on.

​

Meanwhile, what was built on that land? 5 warehouses? Cool none of them are paying a dime towards roads, schools, fire protection, none of it. It's still stuck on this idea that if you bring in businesses by promising low or no taxes that that is good for the communit, but it doesn't do anyone any good because the moment they are forced to start paying taxes they move somewhere else.

This is a completely idiotic idea, completely devoid of any sense at all. This is a tax shift onto the people that can least afford it. The current system (correctly) assesses the taxes on the buildings and improvements upon the land. If I own a vacant lot and get taxed at $1000 and a lot across town has a million dollar factory on it and gets taxed the same $1000, how is that fair or reasonable?

The first problem Erie has is the tax burden of the non profits. We have the hospitals, Gannon, Mercyhurst, Prep, Both federal and county courthouses, the zoo, Library and museum, the public dock, along with a church on every corner. All of those provide services to the entire county and region while the city residents bare the tax burden. Add to that the big industrial centers like GE, LORDS, etc. that are outside of the city. Now add the effects of LERTA and the issue is huge. The biggest solution would be a merger between the city and the county. Eliminate the city police department and move it to the county level. Eliminate the City fire department and make it county wide. Eliminate the City streets department and make it a county wide system. Taxes would go down in the city and up in the county. No more LERTA across the board. The only businesses I see taking advantage of LERTA are businesses that would have built here anyway. Does anyone think Walmart wouldn't have built without LERTA? Does anyone think the hotels wouldn't have been built on the Bayfront without LERTA?

There is nothing beyond wishful thinking in the posts. No evidence that any of the cities are cutting taxes or "finding prosperity" - whatever that means in the real world - by cutting taxes.

Would that be ECRDA.com ECRDA.org ECRDA.net or the various facebook varieties? Brownfields are brownfields there's money in the bank just waiting for some authority somewhere looking to pay a consultant to help them spend all those federal buckeroos.

There is an entire chapter in the PBI book on uniformity, along with a volume of case law and Article VIII, Sect 1 of the PA Constitution, but generally it means all properties in the same category must be assessed similarly. For instance, if your assessed fair market value for a 1 acre lot with a medium-size house is one value but a similar neighbor's house is noticeably less, then there is a uniformity issue. Same class, same assessed value.

Theoretical bs, imho. How can I build my house if I do not own the land upon which I seek to build it?

https://www.ecrda.net/ is the one!

…but you do own it. You bought the land, and you can do what you want with it as long as you can afford to pay the tax. How is that any different from any other tax? This isn’t really an outrageous concept.

I think you missed the single tax aspect. Under such a system your income would not be taxed.

Wouldn’t that in theory make it more expensive to own a lot of land? Just curious

Under the current property assessment scheme in PA, we already pay tax on the land.

A land value tax would replace the existing property tax, and only tax the value of the land itself, not any buildings or other improvements.

Neoliberals are anti-fascist.

>only tax the value of the land itself, not any buildings or other improvements.

In other words, the guy who can only to afford to live in a trailer now would be taxed at the same level as a guy who can afford to put a mansion upon his property?

Still seems like a dumb idea that needs much more thought.