this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2023
6 points (68.8% liked)

Leftism

2113 readers
2 users here now

Our goal is to be the one stop shop for leftism here at lemmy.world! We welcome anyone with beliefs ranging from SocDemocracy to Anarchism to post, discuss, and interact with our community. We are a democratic community, and as such, welcome metaposts that seek to amend the rules through consensus. Post articles, videos, questions, analysis and more. As long as it's leftist, it's welcome here!

Rules:

Posting Expectations:

Sister Communities:

!abolition@slrpnk.net !antiwork@lemmy.world !antitrumpalliance@lemmy.world !breadtube@lemmy.world !climate@slrpnk.net !fuckcars@lemmy.world !iwwunion@lemmy.ml !leftymemes@lemmy.dbzer0.com !leftymusic@lemmy.world !privacy@lemmy.world !socialistra@midwest.social !solarpunk@slrpnk.net Solarpunk memes !therightcantmeme@midwest.social !thepoliceproblem@lemmy.world !vuvuzelaiphone@lemmy.world !workingclasscalendar@lemmy.world !workreform@lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The Power of Land: Georgism 101

https://youtu.be/smi_iIoKybg

Discusses importance of common ownership of land and natural resources

@leftism

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Land allocation must to be managed.

It is not agreeable for any group to use any plot of land for any purpose that is beneficial to members of the group. Further, it would not be beneficial to a group generally to use land outside of some system of more general planning, for proximity to other buildings, resources, and infrastructure Agreements must be negotiated through some general process of land management.

As I earlier explained, Georgism tends not to provide any further value, or solve to any unresolved problem, for leftist tendencies.

[–] jlou@mastodon.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Why is it not agreeable for any group to use land for purposes that is beneficial to the members of the group? I don't see how you could have workplace democracy without this. Of course, the workers in an enterprise are going to use their democratic control rights to make decisions that benefit them.

Sure, there has to be some sort of urban planning and regulations on land use. That is perfectly compatible with Georgism

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Urban planning and land allocation are required for resolving which group may use which land, and which usage is permitted.

Otherwise, conflict would be intractable, and exchange and transportation would be dysfunctional.

If land is managed cooperatively, then once a group is allocated use of land, it may proceed with use, but the public still holds an interest in broader supervision, and in cases of revised planning or observed mismanagement, reallocation may be warranted.

[–] jlou@mastodon.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Land value taxation actually solves the mismanagement problem because as the location site-value increases the workers using the land have to pay more. This gives them an economic incentive to use the land more productively in order to afford the higher land rent

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The public interest in managing land is not limited to assessing how much revenue is generated from its use, nor necessarily strongly bound to such considerations.