Podcasts about georgist

Nineteenth-century American economist Henry George blamed poverty and depressions on landlords. George argued that their rents were associated mainly with public investments and should be shared with the community. Show host Gene Tunny speaks with returning guest John August about Georgism—the economic philosophy of Henry George that advocates for a single tax on land value. They explore the ethical and economic arguments behind taxing land, its historical popularity, and how it is perceived today. The discussion covers economic rent, speculation, tax distortions, and housing policy, critically examining Georgism's assumptions and limitations. John is the Fusion Party candidate for Bennelong in the upcoming Australian federal election. Please let Gene know your thoughts on Trump's tariffs and any questions or comments regarding this episode by emailing Gene at contact@economicsexplored.com.TimestampsIntroduction (0:00)John August's Background and Campaign (4:19)Georgism and Its Influence (7:25)Economic Theory and Georgism (11:35)Critique of Georgism (16:19)Land Value Taxation and Economic Rent (23:15)Impact of Georgism on Economic Policy (31:54)Conclusion and Future Discussion (49:33)TakeawaysGeorgism, developed by Henry George in the 19th century, proposes a radical approach to taxation by advocating for a single tax on land values to address economic inequality and reduce speculation.While most economists reject Georgism, the theory continues to have passionate advocates who argue that land value taxation could create a more productive and just economic system.The Georgist perspective highlights how public infrastructure and community development can increase land values, creating unearned income for property owners without compensating the broader community.Modern Georgists have moved away from the original concept of a 100% land value tax, instead advocating for a significant increase in land value taxation as part of a broader tax reform strategy.The theory raises important questions about property speculation, economic rent, and the potential for less distortionary forms of taxation that could promote more equitable economic development.Links relevant to the conversationJohn's federal election campaign website: John August for Bennelonghttps://www.fusionparty.org.au/john_august_bennelongGrand Pursuit: The Story of Economic Genius - Nasar, Sylviahttps://www.amazon.com.au/Grand-Pursuit-Story-Economic-Genius/dp/0684872986Fixing Australia's Housing Crisis: Fusion's Plan w/ Owen Miller – EP277https://economicsexplored.com/2025/03/27/fixing-australias-housing-crisis-fusions-plan-w-owen-miller-ep277/Trent Saunders and Peter Tulip's RBA Discussion Paper “A Model of the Australian Housing Market”:https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/rdp/2019/2019-01/Lumo Coffee promotion10% of Lumo Coffee's Seriously Healthy Organic Coffee.Website: https://www.lumocoffee.com/10EXPLOREDPromo code: 10EXPLORED Full transcripts are available a few days after the episode is first published at www.economicsexplored.com.

​​Our guest today is economist Noah Smith, who made time for an in-person interview during his recent trip to Taiwan. He runs the Noahpinion substack and is the author of an upcoming book on the revival of the Japanese economy.  We discuss… The goals of Silicon Valley's pro-Trump constituency, from deregulation, to tariffs, to China policy, Whether Elon is standing up for Taiwan behind closed doors, Whether Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, and Poland need their own nuclear weapons, How Taiwan could bargain for independence with China's leaders post-Xi, National health insurance as a potential solution to China's aggregate demand problem, A Georgist perspective on China's real estate problem, Why China's demographic issues are overstated,  Recommendations for Taiwan's economic development. To hear more of Noah's musings, check out Econ 102, a podcast by Turpentine. Outtro music: Wifey by Dizzy Dizzo 蔡詩芸 (Youtube Link) Cover art: 清 冷枚 梧桐双兔图 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

​​Our guest today is economist Noah Smith, who made time for an in-person interview during his recent trip to Taiwan. He runs the Noahpinion substack and is the author of an upcoming book on the revival of the Japanese economy.  We discuss… The goals of Silicon Valley's pro-Trump constituency, from deregulation, to tariffs, to China policy, Whether Elon is standing up for Taiwan behind closed doors, Whether Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, and Poland need their own nuclear weapons, How Taiwan could bargain for independence with China's leaders post-Xi, National health insurance as a potential solution to China's aggregate demand problem, A Georgist perspective on China's real estate problem, Why China's demographic issues are overstated,  Recommendations for Taiwan's economic development. To hear more of Noah's musings, check out Econ 102, a podcast by Turpentine. Outtro music: Wifey by Dizzy Dizzo 蔡詩芸 (Youtube Link) Cover art: 清 冷枚 梧桐双兔图 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today's discussion was recorded in November 2024 and is with Mr. Jamal Thomas, the first-place winner of our 2024 Annual Writing Contest. Mr. Thomas is a college student at El Camino College, where he studies electrical engineering. He spent approximately six years in the United States Navy as a Nuclear Machinist Mate. He is also a member of California Common Ground to advocate community and state-wide political change. Together, we discussed Mr. Thomas's idea for a more equitable banking system, and how it could fund universal basic income. To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smart-talk-hgsss/support

Today's discussion comes from our most recent annual conference “Existential Crises: Is the Georgist Paradigm Part of the Solution?” and was recorded in July of 2024. This is the final panel of our conference content on the polycrisis afflicting the globe. Thus far, we have discussed the four most important crises, followed by how Georgism can alleviate these crises, which was then be followed by how to make Georgism more politically palatable, and will now conclude with different Georgist policy solutions. Today's panelist is part of our fourth and final panel, “The Policy Options.” Our speaker for today's episode is Bryan Kavanagh. Mr. Kavanagh has extensive experience as a real estate evaluator working for the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, as well as its Taxation Office. After many years in the public sector, Bryan went on to establish his own real estate evaluation firm Westlink Consulting. He is a research associate at the Land Values Research Group, a publisher of land-value-based economic research. Mr. Kavanagh is also an Executive Committee member of Prosper Australia, an international NGO committed to economic justice via land redistribution as proposed by Henry George. We were joined by Bryan to discuss how real estate prices impact the boom-bust cycle, why economic crises repeat themselves throughout history, and why economists are not so great at making predictions.  To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smart-talk-hgsss/support

Today's discussion comes from our most recent annual conference “Existential Crises: Is the Georgist Paradigm Part of the Solution?” and was recorded in July of 2024. This is the penultimate panel of our conference content on the polycrisis afflicting the globe. Thus far, we have discussed the four most important crises, followed by how Georgism can alleviate these crises, which was then be followed by how to make Georgism more politically palatable, and will now conclude by with different Georgist policy solutions. Today's panelist is part of our fourth and final panel, “The Policy Options.” Our speaker for today's episode is Professor Roger Sandilands. Professor Sandilands is the president of the Scottish League for Land Value Taxation and Professor Emeritus of Economics at the University of Strathclyde in Glasgow, Scotland. Dr. Sandilands has held numerous research and teaching positions focusing on monetary and international economics at Simon Fraser University in Canada, National University of Singapore, Lund University in Sweden, and Sophia University in Japan, as well as others. He is the author of two books: The Life and Political Economy of Lauchlin Currie and Monetary Correction and Housing Finance in Colombia, Brazil and Chile, as well as numerous journal articles. He also served as the Managing Editor of the Journal of Economic Studies. Professor Sandilands earned his bachelor's and Ph.D. from the University of Strathclyde. Together, we discussed land redistribution, why the supply of land is considered to be fixed, and how land value taxes can spur entrepreneurship. To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smart-talk-hgsss/support

Today's discussion comes from our most recent annual conference “Existential Crises: Is the Georgist Paradigm Part of the Solution?” and was recorded in July of 2024. For the next two weeks, our discussions will revolve around the polycrisis afflicting the globe with four subtopics. The first will be the four most important crises, followed by how Georgism can alleviate these crises, which will then be followed by how to make Georgism more politically palatable, and will conclude by discussing different Georgist policy solutions. Today's panelist is part of our third panel, “Recalibrating the Advocacy of Georgism.” Our speaker for this episode is Dr. Dirk Löhr. Dr. Löhr is a professor of Taxation and Ecological Economics at the Trier University of Applied Sciences and an Associate Professor at Ruhr-University in Bochum, Germany. His career spans both academic and practical roles, including work as a tax adviser, lecturer at the Center for Urban and Real Estate Management in Switzerland, and consultant for German International Cooperation (GIZ) in Cambodia. Dr. Löhr has also held key management positions within the Deutsche Bahn AG, which is a German railroad company. He also currently serves as president of the Association of Social Sciences, a research institution that conducts studies on infrastructure. Dr. Löhr extensive academic contributions include publications on business economics, land taxation, and environmental economics. Together, we discussed why liberals and conservatives tend to get tax policy wrong, the difference between taxes and contributions in Germany, and how land value taxes can reorient revenue to better pay for redistributive policies. To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smart-talk-hgsss/support

Today's discussion comes from our most recent annual conference “Existential Crises: Is the Georgist Paradigm Part of the Solution?” and was recorded in July of 2024. For the next seven weeks, our discussions will revolve around the polycrisis afflicting the globe with four subtopics. The first will be the four most important crises, followed by how Georgism can alleviate these crises, which will then be followed by how to make Georgism more politically palatable, and will conclude by discussing different Georgist policy solutions. Today's panelist is part of our third panel, “Recalibrating the Advocacy of Georgism,” and our speaker is Mr. Ian Kirkwood. Mr. Kirkwood is a freelance graphic designer who has most recently focused his work on land and tax reform in Scotland. He is currently the Director of the Scottish Land Revenue Group, an organization that promotes land value tax as a solution to shrinking public services while also reducing income taxes. In 2020, Ian wrote an article titled, “After the crisis we need to create jobs, not a tax on wealth” which was published in The Times, one of England's oldest newspapers.  Together, we discussed how traditional forms of taxation disincentivize productivity, how a land value tax can replace other forms of taxes, and how Georgists can improve rhetoric around land value taxes to make them more appealing. To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smart-talk-hgsss/support

Today's discussion comes from our most recent annual conference “Existential Crises: Is the Georgist Paradigm Part of the Solution?” and was recorded in July of 2024. For the next eight weeks, our discussions will revolve around the polycrisis afflicting the globe with four subtopics. The first will be the four most important crises, followed by how Georgism can alleviate these crises, which will then be followed by how to make Georgism more politically palatable, and will conclude by discussing different Georgist policy solutions. Today's panelist is part of our second panel, "Is the Georgist Paradigm Part of the Remedy?” Our speaker is a returning guest and long-time Georgist, Dr. Nicolaus Tideman. Dr. Tideman is a Georgist economist whose family have been Georgists for generations. He has spent his career immersed in economics, teaching at numerous universities such as Harvard, the University of Buckingham, and Virginia Tech, where he currently teaches. Dr. Tideman reached the pinnacle of his career in the 1970s working for the president's council of economic advisers. He has held advisory positions within the Office of Management and Budget as well as the Treasury Department. He is the author of many journal publications and of two books: Collective Decisions and Voting and Land and Taxation; both examine collectivist economic models and decision-making. He received his bachelor's degree in mathematics and economics from Reed College and his Ph.D. in economics from the University of Chicago. Together, we got into the weeds of a land value tax, the privatization of rent, and how the end of fractional reserve banking can reduce inequality. To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smart-talk-hgsss/support

Today's discussion comes from our most recent annual conference “Existential Crises: Is the Georgist Paradigm Part of the Solution?” and was recorded in July of 2024. For the next nine weeks, our discussions will revolve around the polycrisis afflicting the globe with four subtopics. The first will be the four most important crises, followed by how Georgism can alleviate these crises, which will then be followed by how to make Georgism more politically palatable, and will conclude by discussing different Georgist policy solutions. Today's panelist is Dr. Kris Feder. Dr. Feder is a recently retired professor at Bard College, where she taught courses on environmental, urban, and ecological economics. She has held numerous fellowships and taught at multiple universities such as West Chester University, Temple University, and Franklin and Marshall College. Dr. Feder has contributed to and coauthored three books: The Corruption of Economics, Beyond Neoclassical Economics: Heterodox Approaches to Economic Theory, and Critics of Henry George. She earned her bachelor's degree from the University of Pennsylvania and her Ph.D. from Temple University.  Together, the Henry George School joined Dr. Feder to discuss modern monetary theory, the benefits of The Green New Deal, and how a land-value tax can be used to pay for its initiatives. To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smart-talk-hgsss/support

Today's discussion comes from our most recent annual conference “Existential Crises: Is the Georgist Paradigm Part of the Solution?” and was recorded in July of 2024. For the next ten weeks, our discussions will revolve around the polycrisis afflicting the globe with four subtopics. The first will be the four most important crises, followed by how Georgism can alleviate these crises, which will then be followed by how to make Georgism more politically palatable, and will conclude by discussing different Georgist policy solutions. Today's panelist is Dr. Franklin Obeng-Odoom, professor of Global Development Studies at the University of Helsinki in Finland.  Dr. Obeng-Odoom is a Fellow at the Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences and has received numerous awards for his scholarship and teaching. He is the author of several books, including Global Migration Beyond Limits; The Commons in an Age of Uncertainty; and Property, Institutions, and Social Stratification in Africa. A productive author, Dr. Obeng-Odoom has authored dozens of journal articles and is on the American Journal of Economics and Sociology editorial board.  We were lucky enough to join Dr. Obeng-Odoom to discuss climate refugees, why environmental justice must include land tenure, and how Georgist philosophy can be broadened to better consider the environment.  To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smart-talk-hgsss/support

Today's discussion comes from our most recent annual conference “Existential Crises: Is the Georgist Paradigm Part of the Solution?” and was recorded in July of 2024. For the next eleven weeks, our discussions will revolve around the polycrisis afflicting the globe with four subtopics. The first will be the four most important crises, followed by how Georgism can alleviate these crises, which will then be followed by how to make Georgism more politically palatable, and will conclude by discussing different Georgist policy solutions.  Our first panelist will be Mr. Fred Harrison, a long-time friend of the Henry George School, who will be discussing the four biggest threats emerging from the global polycrisis. Mr. Harrison received his bachelor's from Oxford University and his master's from the University of London. He is a veteran journalist who has served in multiple news agencies such as The People and Wellington Journal. In 1988 he became the Research Director of the Land Research Trust, London, and has advised several corporations and international governments on tax and economic policy. Fred places an emphasis on the housing market and its interaction with the economy as a whole. He is the author of many books, including The Corruption of Economics, The Power in the Land, and A Philosophy for a Fair Society, all of which critique mainstream economic thinking. Together, we discussed how the current tax system worsens inequality, why Georgist policies can reduce these inequalities, and Boston's stark disparities in life expectancy. To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smart-talk-hgsss/support

If you have an interest in land value taxes and Georgism, you might have come across the acronyms ATCOR - “All taxes come out of rents” - and EBCOR “Excess burdens come out of rents”. Tim Helm, Research Director at Prosper Australia, helps unpack these concepts and how they can be useful for understanding the economy in the 21st century.——————Follow Cameron and Jonathan on X/Twitter. Buy The Great Housing Hijack here.Please like, comment, share, and subscribe.Theme music: Happy Swing by Serge Quadrado Music under Creative Commons Licence CC BY-NC 4.0 This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.fresheconomicthinking.com/subscribe

Symposia is a longer-form podcast where we explore ideas from our previous seminars. Symposia will offer deeper dives on relevant issues to provide listeners with expansive insight. Whether you're an expert or just someone who wants to hear a different perspective, Symposia offers listeners a college-level lecture for everyone to learn from. We want all our listeners to find our discussion stimulating, and hope you walk away having learned something new.  Today's discussion comes from our most recent annual conference, “Existential Crises: Is the Georgist Paradigm Part of the Solution?”, and was recorded in July of 2024. For the next twelve weeks, our discussions will revolve around the polycrisis afflicting the globe with four subtopics. The first will be the four most important crises, followed by how Georgism can alleviate these crises, which will then be followed by how to make Georgism more politically palatable, and will conclude by discussing different Georgist policy solutions.  Our conference content will kick off with a keynote address from our long-time friend of the Henry George School, Mr. Fred Harrison. Mr. Harrison received his bachelor's from Oxford University and his master's from the University of London. He is a veteran journalist who has served in multiple news agencies such as The People and Wellington Journal. In 1988 he became the Research Director of the Land Research Trust, London, and has advised several corporations and international governments on tax and economic policy. Fred places an emphasis on the housing market and its interaction with the economy as a whole. He is the author of many books, including The Corruption of Economics, The Power in the Land, and A Philosophy for a Fair Society, all of which critique mainstream economic thinking. Together, we discussed how Henry George initiated a global reformist movement within politics and economics, how to reinvigorate the Georgist movement, and how this can reverse democratic backsliding around the world. To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smart-talk-hgsss/support

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: End Single Family Zoning by Overturning Euclid V Ambler, published by Maxwell Tabarrok on July 27, 2024 on LessWrong. On 75 percent or more of the residential land in most major American cities it is illegal to build anything other than a detached single-family home. 95.8 percent of total residential land area in California is zoned as single-family-only, which is 30 percent of all land in the state. Restrictive zoning regulations such as these probably lower GDP per capita in the US by 8 36%. That's potentially tens of thousands of dollars per person. Map of land use in San Jose, California. Pink is single family only (94%) The legal authority behind all of these zoning rules derives from a 1926 Supreme Court decision in Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. Ambler realty held 68 acres of land in the town of Euclid, Ohio. The town, wanting to avoid influence, immigration, and industry from nearby Cleveland, passed a restrictive zoning ordinance which prevented Ambler realty from building anything but single family homes on much of their land, though they weren't attempting to build anything at the time of the case. Ambler realty and their lawyer ( a prominent Georgist!) argued that since this zoning ordinance severely restricted the possible uses for their property and its value, forcing the ordinance upon them without compensation was unconstitutional. The constitutionality claims in this case are about the 14th and 5th amendment. The 5th amendment to the United States Constitution states, among other things, that "private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation." The part of the 14th amendment relevant to this case just applies the 5th to state and local governments. There are two lines of argument in the case. First is whether the restrictions imposed by Euclid's zoning ordinance constitute "taking" private property at all. If they are taking, then the 5th amendment would apply, e.g when the govt takes land via eminent domain, they need to compensate property owners. However, even government interventions that do take don't always have to offer compensation. If the government, say, requires you to have an external staircase for fire egress, they don't have to compensate you because it protects "health, safety, and welfare" which is a " police powers" carveout from the takings clause of the 5th amendment. The other line of argument in the case is that zoning ordinances, while they do take from property owners, do not require compensation because they are part of this police power. Police Power Let's start with that second question: whether zoning laws count as protecting health and safety through the police power or are takings that require compensation. A common rhetorical technique is to reach for the most extreme case of zoning: a coal powered steel foundry wants to open up right next to the pre-school, for example. Conceding that this hypothetical is a legitimate use of the police power does not decide the case, however, because Euclid's zoning ordinance goes much further than separating noxious industry from schoolyards. The entire area of the village is divided by the ordinance into six classes of use districts, U-1 to U-6; three classes of height districts, H-1 to H-3, and four classes of area districts, A-1 to A-4. U-1 is restricted to single family dwellings, public parks, water towers and reservoirs, suburban and interurban electric railway passenger stations and rights of way, and farming, noncommercial greenhouse nurseries and truck gardening; U-2 is extended to include two-family dwellings; U-3 is further extended to include apartment houses, hotels, churches, schools, public libraries, museums, private clubs, community center buildings, hospitals, sanitariums, public playgrounds and recreation buildings, and a city ha...

Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: End Single Family Zoning by Overturning Euclid V Ambler, published by Maxwell Tabarrok on July 27, 2024 on LessWrong. On 75 percent or more of the residential land in most major American cities it is illegal to build anything other than a detached single-family home. 95.8 percent of total residential land area in California is zoned as single-family-only, which is 30 percent of all land in the state. Restrictive zoning regulations such as these probably lower GDP per capita in the US by 8 36%. That's potentially tens of thousands of dollars per person. Map of land use in San Jose, California. Pink is single family only (94%) The legal authority behind all of these zoning rules derives from a 1926 Supreme Court decision in Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. Ambler realty held 68 acres of land in the town of Euclid, Ohio. The town, wanting to avoid influence, immigration, and industry from nearby Cleveland, passed a restrictive zoning ordinance which prevented Ambler realty from building anything but single family homes on much of their land, though they weren't attempting to build anything at the time of the case. Ambler realty and their lawyer ( a prominent Georgist!) argued that since this zoning ordinance severely restricted the possible uses for their property and its value, forcing the ordinance upon them without compensation was unconstitutional. The constitutionality claims in this case are about the 14th and 5th amendment. The 5th amendment to the United States Constitution states, among other things, that "private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation." The part of the 14th amendment relevant to this case just applies the 5th to state and local governments. There are two lines of argument in the case. First is whether the restrictions imposed by Euclid's zoning ordinance constitute "taking" private property at all. If they are taking, then the 5th amendment would apply, e.g when the govt takes land via eminent domain, they need to compensate property owners. However, even government interventions that do take don't always have to offer compensation. If the government, say, requires you to have an external staircase for fire egress, they don't have to compensate you because it protects "health, safety, and welfare" which is a " police powers" carveout from the takings clause of the 5th amendment. The other line of argument in the case is that zoning ordinances, while they do take from property owners, do not require compensation because they are part of this police power. Police Power Let's start with that second question: whether zoning laws count as protecting health and safety through the police power or are takings that require compensation. A common rhetorical technique is to reach for the most extreme case of zoning: a coal powered steel foundry wants to open up right next to the pre-school, for example. Conceding that this hypothetical is a legitimate use of the police power does not decide the case, however, because Euclid's zoning ordinance goes much further than separating noxious industry from schoolyards. The entire area of the village is divided by the ordinance into six classes of use districts, U-1 to U-6; three classes of height districts, H-1 to H-3, and four classes of area districts, A-1 to A-4. U-1 is restricted to single family dwellings, public parks, water towers and reservoirs, suburban and interurban electric railway passenger stations and rights of way, and farming, noncommercial greenhouse nurseries and truck gardening; U-2 is extended to include two-family dwellings; U-3 is further extended to include apartment houses, hotels, churches, schools, public libraries, museums, private clubs, community center buildings, hospitals, sanitariums, public playgrounds and recreation buildings, and a city ha...

There's a lot of takeaways from any conversation with Joe Minicozzi, or one of his many public presentations. Here's mine today: omnipotent forces didn't create our current systems, whether we are talking about zoning, traffic engineering or tax assessment. Or, in fact, just about anything in life.These were all created by fallible humans. We can, and should, change them. It's our duty, our responsibility. Your local tax system, and your local zoning code were not handed down to you by Moses from the mountain.Joe Minicozzi of Urban 3 is one of those rare people that just has a knack for communicating complex ideas. If you haven't seen one of his presentations, run out and do so. Here's a sample from Not Just Bikes, and one from Strong Towns. Today, we talk in audio form instead of video, but I suspect you'll enjoy it just the same. Since this is a blog, too, here's a few visual references for fun:Find more content on The Messy City on Kevin's Substack page.Music notes: all songs by low standards, ca. 2010. Videos here. If you'd like a CD for low standards, message me and you can have one for only $5.Intro: “Why Be Friends”Outro: “Fairweather Friend”Text Transcript:Kevin K (00:01.231) Welcome back to the Messy City podcast. You know, one of the joys that I've had in being involved with the New Urbanism Movement and the Congress for New Urbanism for many, many years is you get to meet and know people who take a lot of issues that we talk about and care about and completely reframe them and make them much more interesting and accessible and understandable, I think, to a larger audience. And there's been a number of people who who've done that or I've seen that happen in the course of my career. And one of those is joining me here today, live from Asheville, North Carolina, Joe Minicozzi. Joe, how's it going, Joe Minicozzi (00:42.018) Great, thanks for having Kevin K (00:43.771) Well, it's fun. I've been wanting to do this one for a little while and it's you're a busy guy and I'm really glad you made some time. Joe, you may know he's often had his work featured in Strong Towns. He's a regular on the speaking circuit with his firm, Urban 3, and he's really developed a unique approach to kind of explaining our built environment in graphic and financial terms I think has changed a lot of people's thinking about things. And we're going to get to some of that. Joe has, one of the cool things, Joe, is you're working all over the country. So there's always something new to talk about. But before we get there, I do think it's interesting for people to understand your background because like somebody coming upon you today and one of your presentations, they might think, he's like this kind of urban guru guy. What does that mean? Or he's like a financial guru guy, but you're actually, you're an architect. Correct? Not licensed, but educated. Yes. Where did... I don't think... One thing I never knew, Joe, like, where did you grow Joe Minicozzi (01:44.476) Well, not licensed. Can say that. Educated, yeah. Yeah. Yeah, so... Go Joe Minicozzi (01:56.116) upstate New York, Rust Belt, little town called Rome, New York. Kevin K (01:57.445) Ruffio. cool, that's a cool town. Joe Minicozzi (02:05.282) Why do you say that? That it's not cool. When I was Kevin K (02:07.983) Well, I mean, there's some cool built fabric there. No? Joe Minicozzi (02:11.256) No. When I was a kid, they tore down most of downtown. It was literally one of the largest urban renewal projects per capita in the entire United States. And they blew up, I don't know, like eight to 10 blocks of downtown and built a wooden fort. There's a revolutionary wooden fort in what used to be our downtown. Google Rome, New York and go into the downtown, you'll see it. Kevin K (02:39.715) OK, I must be thinking of pictures I've seen of a different upstate New York downtown then or something. Joe Minicozzi (02:43.288) Oh no, no, it's, didn't, but I didn't realize that was abnormal because you you grew up in a town of 30 ,000 people, this is it, right? That's all you know. You just, so when you go to college, you're just like, yeah, surely like you've got a fort in your downtown, right? You know, everybody's got one. Actually Savannah has one. So, but it's not in the downtown. They didn't eliminate Savannah to rebuild a wooden fort. Yeah, but this is a magnet that I have that I in my bookcase over here. This is my grandfather. Kevin K (03:03.193) Right. That would have been rather odd. Joe Minicozzi (03:13.34) used to tie a rope to this thing. And he's an Italian carpenter, first generation American. And he's tied a rope to this and that rope was tied to my waist. And I used to just walk around job sites all day with him as a kid. I was like, you know, six years old walking around a job site with this huge magnet tied to my waist. And I was picking up nails and I would just sit there with this little anvil, like making the nails go straight so he could reuse them because you know, he's depression era. And I thought I was building buildings since I'd go home and talk to my dad and I was like, I'm building buildings with Papa. And he goes, sounds like you want to be an architect. And I was like, Bing, I want to be an architect. so that's, I wanted to be an architect since I was nine years old and I went to architecture school. Kevin K (03:53.903) You know, that's funny. That's like a weird thing we share in common. It's like, I don't know how that happened with me, because I actually didn't know anybody, you know, in architecture. And I knew a few people who built things, but for whatever reason, I just like always knew I wanted to go into architecture and city planning. it's it's just where I was. So, but anyway, so go ahead. Yeah. Yeah. I had no idea. Like why showed up to like freshman year? Joe Minicozzi (04:12.386) Yeah, like, they really cool pencils, right? I mean, it's like little clicker pencils, awesome, great tools. Kevin K (04:22.199) And here's the list of all the s**t you have to buy. And I was like, what is, what does even all this stuff do? Joe Minicozzi (04:25.162) Yeah, here's, out and buy a thousand dollars worth of stuff. Yeah, little, remember that, God, I hate saying this, it sounds old. I was explaining to somebody on staff, remember those little letter writing tools, that little plastic thing that you'd have to put on your parallel bar to make those three lines to do your lettering properly? That was insane. Anyway, sorry, sorry kids. That doesn't exist anymore because we actually type in computers now. Kevin K (04:39.745) my god, yeah. Kevin K (04:44.805) Totally, Yeah. Kevin K (04:53.349) Yeah, I know. Everyone wants to share. mean, actually learning how to do architectural lettering was a pretty cool thing. I mean, I always liked the benefit of Joe Minicozzi (04:59.628) Well, the frustrating thing for me is you go all the way through architecture school and the University of Miami is a five -year program and you never built a building. So how can you be a designer of a building and not understand how it's constructed? So in my fifth year, we petitioned the school to build a homeless shelter and we just went ahead and built it, designed it, built it, worked with homeless folks to figure out what are their needs? How do we help solve the problem architecturally? And think that's one of the beauties of Miami is that, you know, the whole time I was, know, Miami is known for its new urbanism, but I was always talking with Liz Plater -Zyberg about what was going on in my hometown, because here you have a town that was designed for walkability, designed for the things that new urbanists would proclaim, yet it was dead as a doornail and we were eliminating our downtown. And Liz would always say to me, she's like, well, that's economics. That's something different. and we're trying to deal with this flood of what's happening in South Florida. That's a different reality. So this whole being seen as an economist is mostly about chasing a question of what are the policies that shape our environment and how do I visualize those for folks, which is very in line with new urbanism. We just look at the money Kevin K (06:15.397) So talk a little bit about how you got to this point then professionally of working on your own and doing a lot of the economic analysis work that you do Joe Minicozzi (06:24.984) Well, mean, if first is working in architecture, and I think this is probably true for most people that are urban designers, is that you want to look at the context of things that's more exciting for you, or why would somebody say, I'm hiring you, the architect, to do an office building here? If you have an urban design mind, you're like, an office building? Why not a mixed use building or why not a residential building? Why is that developer choosing? That's really the design is when the developer makes a choice, right? And so why is the developer choosing office over residential or over retail? In having an urban design mindset, you're going to be more empowered to be looking for those things, those other forces. What are the financial streams? So after architecture, I went to grad school and then started doing like internships in real estate development, real estate finance. I worked at John Hancock Real Estate Investment Group in Boston. kind top of the food chain, where they had $4 billion worth of real estate across the country. And you're seeing how they're making decisions financially about what's going on in your town, right? Because they're going to be doing an asset in your town, a strip mall or a mall or whatever, right? Totally different design series. It was fascinating to watch, but it felt, if you saw the movie, The Big Short, it felt a lot like that. It was like, wow, these people are like on a different way of thinking. Like there's questions they're just not even asking. We were spending $100 million a year fixing the buildings that we owned. Now when you're making 15 bucks an hour, like that's a lot of money, right? And so you'd sit there, trained as an architect, you'd sit there with these asset managers and I would literally show them pictures of buildings that we owned, a building that we owned in Topeka and a building that we owned in Tacoma. And there are two office buildings that we owned. And I would ask the finance officers, I'm like, what's the difference between these two buildings? And they would start going through all of this gibberish of numbers and cash flows, cap rates, NOI, all of that stuff. And I'm like, no, no, no, look at the pictures. And like, what are you talking about? I'm like, it's the same damn building. We own the same building, the same office park building in Topeka and Tacoma. And you know, they fall apart differently based on the ecosystem. And this was like mind blowing to Joe Minicozzi (08:43.104) And it's just like, wow, they don't even understand what this... It's just a cashflow model for them. It's not a building, right? As an architect, you're going to... Like the windows fall apart differently. It's going to be based on the heat load of the air conditioner, all that stuff. But it's kind of mind blowing that this is the cashflow, the invisible sine curve that's moving by low cell high, that's moving through the system. And we're not even talking about it. So it's always... Yeah, go ahead. Well, it's always made me curious and got into real estate development. And then during the recession is when I started Urban 3, trying to help cities understand that they're prey to these sign curves. Kevin K (09:20.539) Yeah. I remember you used to tell a story about working at John Hancock and I think this is just instructive for people to understand the world of like big development, big finance was I think you had a story about we had they had X million dollars that they had to place within like 48 hours or something like that. What was Joe Minicozzi (09:37.56) Yeah. It was called a capital call where the CEO of the real estate arm came in and said, need to get, I think it was like $120 million into the ground in the next quarter. So that was an issuance that he was given from Topress. think of anybody that's on this podcast, if you have a 401k plan, if you're like CalPERS is the biggest one, the California teachers. pension. They have to make money on their money, right? So they take your retirement investment and they go out and make money so that you can have growth in your dollars as an investor. So if you want to see your 401k plan grow, well, somebody's got to make that money grow. So they're going around, in case of John Hancock, that's an insurance company. So somebody buys John Hancock life insurance. They want to return when they die on their money. what they do at the top level of John Hancock, they're putting some money into bonds, money into stocks, some money into real estate. So ours was the real estate arm. And whatever decision was made at the top, money came into the real estate world and was like, okay, that needs to get into the ground as fast as possible. So they were issued this $120 million in the next quarter. So the people that are finance managers call up all of their developer friends and were like, can I buy a building somewhere? That was basically how it happened. And the more expensive the building, the better because the more we can get that $120 million down to zero, the faster with less transactions. So imagine if you were the guy on the office that found a hundred million dollar building, like that's actually good, right? Now in architecture world, when we go to school, we're learning the direct opposite, like smaller, like little investments. We're not thinking about the big fish that are out there. anyway. Kevin K (11:25.583) Yeah. Sometimes it feels like you're like a language translator, Joe. It's like you have these two different worlds that you have grown to understand really well. One is like architecture and development, and the other is finance. And do you feel like you're kind of like straddling those worlds and trying to explain one to the Joe Minicozzi (11:44.652) Yeah, it's a simple sense, the tagline of our company is a data -driven storytelling, you know, that we have to communicate this stuff. And so lot of what we do is just unnerve things. I just came back from a meeting with our county assessor and their consultant, and, you know, he's going through this report that's got how many pages? I don't know, but it's all this. And it's like, how can you show me all of this text? and start talking to me about it. And I'm just like, I'm like, dude, you got to show me a picture somewhere. It's like, this is crazy. And so what we do is if you watch any of our work, we spent a ton of time breaking a city down to reveal its essence. So I don't need to get into like whether or not your spark plugs are firing at 20 beats per second or whatever. I need to just show you your car works, right? What does the audience want? They don't need to know the details. And far too many of us technically, trained folks, even architects, get down into the details and the audience doesn't necessarily understand does the car work, yes or no. So that's basically the method of our work is try to make it simple for folks. I use lot of analogies when I talk to people because that's how we relate. that's kind of, think of it having a curious mind, you want to go in and break something down, but to be able to speak it to a regular audience. It's not that the audience is stupid, it's just people just don't care about those kinds of details, they just want to know the bigger picture. Kevin K (13:19.545) Yeah, yeah. And so before we get into a couple of those stories, I am also curious, when you started your business in the recession, how did you, like who were your first clients and how did you get going in that world? Because it's definitely a different thing for an architect or urban designer to get into. Joe Minicozzi (13:39.448) You know, the funny thing was, I remember in the recession, I think I did a local lecture here in Asheville to the AIA, to the Architects Association. You know, it's a recession. Yeah, you're not building buildings. So as an architect, you're out of work, you know? But what's crazy about the architectural education, it's really an amazing education in creative thinking, but also critical thinking, right? So we're all given, you remember studio, there's like 15 of us in a studio, we're all given one problem to solve, but you're get 15 different answers, right? So that's the creative side. But the analytic side happens in all of that, that we're trying to break it down and figure it out before we can get to a design process. So that's the critical thinking side. Those skills can be applied anywhere. And then also in architecture, what do you do at the end of the semester? You have to pin up your work and you have to defend but it has to communicate to an audience visually, right? They need to understand what's going on in the design intent by what they see on the wall and how you present it. If you just look at that as a basic educational format, that can be applied anywhere. So we just applied architectural thinking to quantitative economic data for cities, right? So we get all of your data. We figure out what's its floor plan. Like why is this road here? Why is your city grown a certain way? That's all a floor plan, right? But there are decisions that are made along the way that fuel that growth. So if I add three bedrooms to my house, was it because I had four kids? know, it's like, that's the decision point for growing the house. Well, the same is true for cities. So we see when you get white flight, you're going to see that like in Kansas City. We saw that in Kansas City, Missouri, like this massive growth, southward, northward and westward or eastward, That's the whole, and that all happened really fast from 1950 forward. I think you, it's something like you doubled your population from 250 to 500, but you've 10 times your land area, which is crazy. Kevin K (15:52.475) Yeah, yeah, it's somewhere. We had a massive geographic expansion from the like 1947 city until today. I think the original 1947 city or so was probably in the ballpark of about 40 square miles. And now it's like 315 or so. Joe Minicozzi (16:15.242) I'm just drawing off the top of my head. There's an actual presentation out there somewhere, but I think it was like three times the road per person growth. So you're taking down three times the cost. So yeah, during the recession, was basically, I was showing up at conferences trying to help folks that were trying to have conversations about walkability, urban design, equity, and trying Kevin K (16:19.865) Yeah. yeah, absolutely. Joe Minicozzi (16:44.472) trying to share that the things that actually are all things that we advocate for also produce more wealth for communities. Does that make sense? So it was just like, look, we should just talk about that. Rather than say that it's good to have walkability, that can seem like a threat to an individual that you're trying to get me out of my car. That's very judgy. So rather than get involved in that emotionally, let's just talk about the fact that a Walmart actually destroys your wealth. Don't hate the player, hate the game, but you better understand the game. So when we did the models early on, it was just comparing Walmarts to Main Street, and Main Street was winning every single time. But why don't we build more Main Streets? Because the reverse is true, that we make it easier to do the Walmart, we tax it less, we charge it less, so that of course, Walmart's going to... You're going to see more Walmart -type buildings. I don't mean to be picking on Walmart so much. It's That's like a prototype, like the boxes. Those are throwaway architecture. So if you have property tax system that's based on your value of property, then there's an incentive for me to build junk in your community, right? The crappier the building I build, the lower the taxes I pay. Has nothing to do with the costs of the property. So the typical Walmart consumes two police officers per Walmart. So it actually costs you more in police services than a Walmart pays in property taxes. So if you were the owner of a Walmart, that's a good deal for you, right? So don't hate them. I hate us for not doing the math on that. It's that's shame on us. It's not hard. You just go call the police chief and say how many police officers are at Walmart every day and they'll tell you. That's data, Kevin K (18:28.015) Yeah. So let's talk about some of the recent data then. Not far from Walmart country, you've been working in Springfield, Missouri, which obviously is southwest Missouri, not far from Bentonville, Arkansas, which is the home base for Walmart. So we were talking, yeah, and Bentonville's actually an amazing, really cool town. And so you've been down in Springfield doing a bunch of work, and we were chatting about it. Joe Minicozzi (18:44.69) We've done Bentonville too, yeah. Kevin K (18:57.6) So this kind of took you in a little different direction. You started looking at trees and stormwater and everything else. I wonder if you could kind of talk through that scenario. Joe Minicozzi (19:05.888) Yeah. Springfield is really cool. it's one, it's nice about it. It's just straight smack dab in the middle of the country. It's Midwestern. There's not a lot of dynamic change to it because you don't have the coastal pressures of being next to an ocean or something like that. You don't have the rapid change of Silicon Valley where there's crazy changes in employment. It's very stable that And so in that stability, it's sort of a nice control subject of what's going on here. It's also not, it's not at the edge of some blast zone of some other city, you know? So think of like Rancho Cucamonga, California, which is outside the blast zone of Los Angeles. So whatever happens on Los Angeles is going to spread into the suburbs, suburb cities that are around it. So anyway, putting that aside. There's also this business person there, his name is Jack Stack, who wrote this game called The Great Game of Business, awesome book about business transparency. So the quote that I like of his is, I'm reading it right here, it says, a business should be run like an aquarium where everybody can see what's going on, what's going in, what's moving around, and what's coming out. So his theory of business is that everybody inside the company should know the balance sheet, they should know the P &L. that it's not him as the business owner, that he has a gold mine of money in the basement. You know, that everybody on staff should understand they've got to pay rent, they've got to pay insurance, all this stuff has costs. Well, our attitude is the same with cities. We should make the city economics so transparent that everybody understands the land use, the economic consequences of land use decisions. Don't tell me that people just want to live out in suburbia. Of course, if you're subsidizing them, why wouldn't you want to live in suburbia? So they hired us to do that modeling. Their city has run mostly off sales tax. think it's 86 % of their revenue comes from sales tax, 14 % comes from property tax, as far as geospatial, things we can put on a map. So that's kind of like the majority of their cashflow. When I did the presentation there, Joe Minicozzi (21:27.2) One of the things that we're doing the first side, showing the revenue and we're getting feedback from the staff and you're an urban designer, I'm an urban designer. One of the things that we tend to pay attention to how a city is shaped and what it looks like when we drive around. There weren't a lot of street trees in the city. And Graham Smith from Multi Studio based in Kansas City. He's the urban designer on the project. Graham said to me, goes, Kevin K (21:49.935) Yep. Joe Minicozzi (21:54.988) Do notice there's not a lot of street trees? And I was like, yeah, that's kind of crazy. It's like, it's like somehow like trees don't happen in the city. So I made a comment about it during the staff meeting and somebody in the engineering department said to me, well, I said, why don't you have trees? And he just said to me, goes, well, it's because trees attack the streets and sidewalks and use that word attack. I like my, my designer kicked in and I immediately responded. Do you not know how to design a tree pit? And then I stopped and I was like, well, that's not fair because I'm going to put them in the defensive. so, you know, this is somebody that's coming in with a mindset of maybe he came from, life safety or something, or the risk department inside city government. So he's only looking at it as a balance sheet item of one line item. Yes. A tree could screw up a sidewalk if you don't plant the proper tree species and don't build a tree pit. I got it. But it doesn't mean you should just lay waste to all trees. So just for fun. I came back to the office, I talked with Lea Hanringer, who was on the project. was like, and Lea's interested in understanding climate effects. So let's just look at the trees and what they could do financially for the city. So the whole stormwater system is, well, currently they're at a $9 million a year deficit in their stormwater system. They should be spending 15 million a year. They're only spending 6 million a year. So let that wash over you. They're not investing enough in their system that they've built. So that's only going to cause an economic collapse at some point in the future. If I don't brush my teeth every day, that's going to be a problem. One of them is going to fall out, right? So brushing my teeth every day is a maintenance issue. Same is true with any kind of infrastructure system. But to just go out and just totally replace the whole infrastructure system, if we just went out and built their stormwater system today, it'd be $600 million, $661 million worth of investment. So we considered the tree as a pipe and just said, what do trees do? And we actually made a cartoon of two sponges on a stick because there's a sponge in the air called leaves that suck water when the water hits it, keeps it from hitting the ground. And there's a root system that absorbs water from the ground. All of that keeps it out of the stormwater system. So a tree is essentially a pipe replacement, just to be crude about it, right? The average tree in Springfield, Missouri. And again, you don't have to be exact. Joe Minicozzi (24:23.192) Let's just get in the ballpark. It's like 770 gallons of water per tree gets sucked out of the air and 1500 gallons a year gets sucked out of the ground by the root system. So we can do the math on that and we kind of did an estimate based on the trees that they currently have in their city. Scaling that up, you're talking $600 ,000 of savings in the air and $1 .6 million savings in the ground. So that's $2 .2 million a year that you're not paying. in your stormwater system because of these trees. Here's an idea. Buy more trees. That sounds like a real rocket science idea. But I know, hey Joe, trees cost money, then we're gonna have to maintain them, we're have to make sure that we've got to get out and fix a sidewalk every once in while because we did something wrong. Okay, well we can do numbers on that. So we ran the math on it. The average benefit from the tree is a pipe, if you will. is about $115 a tree. The cost is 75 bucks. 'all take out your calculators at home, subtract $75 from 115. That means it's net positive 40 bucks a tree. we just, you know, just as a rough estimate, if you just go out and plant 10 ,000 trees, you're going to be net positive $400 ,000 a year. You can essentially use the tree to manufacture money to buy for police officers. That's cool. So don't just take it and look at that one side and just like, yeah, it's complicated to fix a sidewalk. What are the downstream effects of this? Now to kind of scale this up, remember I said $600 million system. Eugene, Oregon, we just happen to have the data. So Springfield's 170 ,000 people, Eugene, Oregon's 175, so it's got 5 ,000 more people in it. The stormwater system in Eugene, which actually has more rain in Eugene than in Missouri. Their stormwater system cost 400 million dollars versus Springfield is six hundred and and and 20 million dollars so so basically another way putting this Eugene, Oregon saved a hundred and eighty million dollars in their stormwater system and It comes down to the fact that they're a lot smaller. They the city shape is more compact So by doing compact design, you can actually save a hundred and eighty million Joe Minicozzi (26:46.903) Does that make sense? It's 35 square miles for Eugene. It's 83 square miles for Springfield. Kevin K (26:52.327) And to put it in context, I would imagine Eugene is still largely a city of like single -family homes. It's just maybe exactly, it's just a different layout for the city itself and how everything is configured on the ground. Joe Minicozzi (26:59.862) Yeah, yeah, it's not European. Joe Minicozzi (27:09.592) Well, our attitude is like, look, these are your choices. I live here in Asheville. So if you want to stretch out, fine. If you're a Midwestern city and you're like, hey Joe, this is the Midwest, you don't understand, we got lots of land here, we're gonna stretch out. It's like, oh cool, yeah, do it. But just make sure that you understand the cost of that stretching out and make sure that you let your decision makers know that people want to have a one acre yard, awesome, but it's gonna cost us $180 million more in a stormwater Is that the best choice for that public investment, that $180 million? Or could you have, I don't know, sent every child on a walkabout sabbatical around the world with that investment? There's lots of choices you could do with $180 million. Let's just be honest about Kevin K (27:58.117) Yeah, no doubt. Not to mention like one of the least of which could just be like lower taxes if that's your thing, you know. Joe Minicozzi (28:06.232) Well, or you could have invested that $180 million in more trees and you would have had $50 million of new revenue in your system on an annual basis, which is more than the ARPA funding that you got. ARPA was just a one year deal. Like you could actually manufacture more money than the federal government gave you. I mean, come on now, let's just talk about Kevin K (28:18.307) Right. Kevin K (28:24.123) Yeah. And I think the interesting thing is you're not even really getting into what some people might think of as like the frou frou design benefits of trees versus not trees in this. And so makes it a more pleasant place to walk or Joe Minicozzi (28:37.174) yeah. Aesthetic quality that reduces the heat island effect, reduces your air conditioning bills because you're not dealing with the outward effect of radiation. mean, there's lots of things. CO2, I mean, we didn't get an A that. We're just like a tree as a pipe replacement. Just start there. But yeah, if you did do those numbers, if you read, I don't know if you see on the bookcase up here, Happy City. and they get in the quantitative sociological effects that are actually financial as well because Canadians measure that stuff. We don't in America because we don't pay for health systems at the government level. So when the government actually does pay for the health system, they kind of want to know what the costs are. know, Charles Montgomery used all of that math in there to explain the financial consequences. I think the book is sort of a mislabeled. I think it's more of an economic than with the name Canotes. Kevin K (29:35.739) So at the stage you are now with Springfield, have you presented all this information to them and had that out in the world? Joe Minicozzi (29:45.356) Yeah. Well, one of the biases was that they wanted to continue to annex more land. And the first question I asked, which was why? And they said, well, people live out there and there's some higher wealth houses that are out there. Therefore, we're going to get higher taxes. And the reality of it is, and this is back to the original analysis that we did, which is the value per acre analysis. One of the biases people have with math is when they see like the Walmart's worth $20 million, they get really excited about it, especially compared to a building that we rehabbed on Main Street here in Asheville that's $11 million. So Walmart's twice the value, right? But that Walmart took 34 acres of our city versus our building on 0 .5 acres. And it's just a habit that humans have where they just immediately go to the big number without understanding the efficiency. Well, the same is true with suburbia. It's like, okay, yeah, they're experiencing wealth flight out of Springfield where people are just outside the city limits out in the county in their high -end neighborhoods. But when we do our tax model, you can see that they're actually not that productive. That's the first thing. Back to how I said, Springfield gets its money. They get their money off sales taxes. So why would you want to chase residential? Makes no sense. So we're gonna go and bring them into the city limits and then we're have to provide more services for them and not get any taxes out of them because we get all of our taxes out of sales. I actually told the audience when that question came up, I said, look, right now they're living outside, driving into your city and shopping, you're collecting their sales tax dollars and they're going home. You don't have to pay for their schools, you don't have to police them, you don't have to put the fire services for them, that's their problem. Why would you wanna take them in? and have more costs in your community when you're already getting the money that you need, which is the sales taxes. And as a planner, I hate saying that because it's like, everybody should be part of the community if you're involved at an economic level, but from a brass tax of how their financial system operates, there's no incentive for them to annex that land. But again, when you have the politics of everybody just there, and this is something just true to the new, as long as you've been in new urbanism and I've been involved, it's like this kind of habit. Joe Minicozzi (32:10.06) that we are America, so we must suburbanize. It's just this, it's ingrained in us. And it's really, it's a myth more than anything else. Kevin K (32:17.014) Right. So it also kind of strikes me, one of the interesting things about your work or that you get to see is the very different ways that local governments are funded all over the country. So you've talked about this example in Missouri, and it's probably really similar to how my city is. If I broke down our property tax bill, I think about 70 % of it goes to the school district. And then it's kind of apportioned up between the county and the city and some other, like the library board and a mental health. Board etc, but the lion's share is a school district and most of our city revenue is sales tax and then income tax because we Yeah, which is rare, but we have an income tax But I'm curious like what you've seen like around the country. Are there approaches that seem better worse more sustainable less sustainable or they just like they're Joe Minicozzi (32:54.4) Yeah, which is very rare. Yeah, that's Joe Minicozzi (33:08.916) They're all different. One of the jokes that I used to make is when we did this, I want to reference my former boss, Pat Whalen, in public interest projects. Pat's amazing. He's a genius. Pat had this incredible PowerPoint called the Economic and Environmental Case for Urbanism. And so he's the director of a real estate company trying to explain the value of downtown revitalization to people. That's where the value per acre analysis comes from. It was part of his show. what was interesting is it made sense in Asheville, and I just started poking around other cities in North Carolina because I was on the Downtown Association Board, and we're trying to figure out the value of our downtown versus other downtowns. you have a day job working for a district, the real Kevin Klinkenberg, you have this day job for this boundary. Well, don't you want to know how you operate versus the downtown improvement district or the Westport improvement district? Yeah, of course you do. So I was doing that for 10 cities bigger than Asheville and 10 cities smaller than Asheville. What's our taxable, non -taxable ratio? Who's got too much non -taxable? I don't know. Like until you get the data. So I made this shared website that's a Google document. And I shared it with the downtown directors for all the 10 cities and we populated it so we could all get metrics to understand how we stack up. What was your original question? Kevin K (34:43.963) It's just about the different mechanisms for a big local Joe Minicozzi (34:46.75) yeah. So, in that, we started to see that the downtowns were crushing it versus every other part of the city. Right? So, as an urban designer, we advocate for walkability, downtowns, everybody likes them, why don't we do more? And we start to find all the zoning rules that don't allow it, all the policies that don't allow it, and all the biases. And a whole Congress for urbanism is essentially discussing these things, going, who the hell put these things in place? You know, it's just, that's what we do. And we try to undo. these kind of rules that kind of get in the way. So I was doing, I think I was talking to Peter Katz and he's like, does it work this way in Florida? And I was like, I don't know. And so he hired us to do the analysis in Sarasota and sure enough, it was the same damn thing. So here's the way I see it. Florida has totally different rules than North Carolina. North Carolina has different policies than South Carolina, which is way different from Missouri. Everybody's got different state tax policy rules. But you know, and I know, when you drive around suburban Phoenix or suburban Los Angeles or suburban Boston, you see the same crap. To the radio audience, that's an architectural terminology, but it's like you see the same junk everywhere, right? And I told Peter, said, you know, it's hilarious to me. We all have different math, but it yields the same results. So in North Carolina, it's two plus two equals In South Carolina, it's three plus one equals four. In Florida, it's one plus three equals four. In California, it's 22 times 16 divided by the square root of 47 equals four. You know, it's like, we can make it complex, but at end of the day, that's all we have to do is use our eyes and go around suburbia and say, why is this happening? And you're going to see the same exact economic results in the landscape that's baked into the policy to reward it happening. So sort of shame on us for, you know, I don't have a math degree. I'm trained as an artist like you. I draw pictures, but I'm gonna go look at those policies and read them. Sometimes it gives you an aneurysm when you read some of these policies. But I think that's the beauty of the world that you and I operate in, is we're not afraid of that stuff. We'll get involved in transportation policies. Let's go read the ITE manual. It's like, of nerd does that, but we do it. Kevin K (37:07.611) I mean, if you talk to me when I was 19 years old in architecture school and said, well, hey, you're going to learn all about the intricacies of zoning codes and traffic engineering and also like, what? What are you talking about? But if you really want to understand your world and make a difference in it, you've got to dive into those things. So yeah, exactly. And actually, it is kind of fun and interesting to learn that it was fascinating to me when I first learned. Joe Minicozzi (37:25.826) and not fear Kevin K (37:35.003) much more about traffic engineering, like how engineers actually thought and what they were looking at and how they were evaluating streets and intersections and everything else to come up with their solutions. Joe Minicozzi (37:47.544) Well, you can be a better practicing professional too if you're respecting their profession and saying, I want to learn how you operate. Now I'm going to call BS on things when I see it, but at the same time, I'm going to respect that you have knowledge that I don't and I want to learn. But the thing that makes, I think that makes you and I different is that we also know that Moses didn't deliver their rules. That these are not infallible people that have designed this stuff. Kevin K (38:12.184) Right. Joe Minicozzi (38:16.056) that these are humans that are operating with their best intention, but often they make mistakes. Kevin K (38:22.331) No doubt, no doubt. I think we don't emphasize that enough that really so much of what we struggle against is just people trying to create systems and rules and then working with it and all of that can be changed. Joe Minicozzi (38:37.112) Yeah. Well, I just, this morning I sat with my county assessor and this is trouble that we started back in 2021. And here we are three years later and we're going through a reassessment in January of this year. And he's telling me that like a lot of the things that we recommended back in 2022, they're going to do, but they're not going to do it until 2029. I just about lost my mind. I was like, you know how many human beings my wife and I could produce in four years and you can't change policy? Come on now. That's bias in the system where it's like, there's nothing to stop them. It's just they've never done things this fast before. it was kind of frustrating and I told them, said, look, you just need to see me as a taxpayer now and not a consultant. I live here. My staff suffers. Kevin K (39:12.377) Yeah. Joe Minicozzi (39:32.438) with housing, everybody I know suffers with housing in this community because we're a hot market right now. And it's not fair that because you're going to be uncomfortable changing the way that you behave, there's no law that says you can't do this. This is just about your practice. And we see this, you've seen this with your career with city planners. It's like, well, we just haven't done it that way before. It's like, well, change. Kevin K (39:55.749) Yeah, yeah, it's not hard. It's not the end of the world, you know. Joe Minicozzi (39:57.622) The world's not going to stop. And guess what? Guess what? You're going to make a mistake again. Yeah, it's going to happen. It's like we're humans. Kevin K (40:05.423) I know. There's a real struggle a lot of times to just get people to take a risk to try something and try and fail and if you fail, it's not the end of the world. So what has Joe Minicozzi (40:16.376) They won't assess Airbnb's as commercial product. I'm like, dude, we've got 4 ,000 of them in my city. I've got people from Florida, cash flowing houses up here, and they're paying them off in four years. And my staff can't do that. I can't do that. Like, what the hell? And so why are you choosing to value them as houses and not commercial product? And the state, the state charges an occupancy tax on top of them, right? So the state knows that they're hotel rooms. Kevin K (40:19.532) yeah. Joe Minicozzi (40:45.368) because they're paying an occupancy tax, much like a hotel room would. So why are you choosing to value it differently and not value it on its cap rate? And I'm serious. Like I know that I'm kind of like beating this drum about here in Asheville. Nationwide, this is a problem. And the assessors are like, well, you know, it takes a while to kind of work this out. I'm like, no, Airbnb has been around since 2015. For f**k's sake. Sorry. It's like, this is, it shouldn't take 10 years. Kevin K (40:59.547) Yeah, no Joe Minicozzi (41:14.626) to realize how it affected the marketplace. You just sound stupid at that point. we don't understand. Kevin K (41:19.289) Yeah, it was crazy. It was such a big issue, as you might imagine, in Savannah, which I think for a time, Savannah was like the number one city in the world for Airbnb. Joe Minicozzi (41:29.516) Well, at least in Georgia, you have a separation between an occupant and a non -occupant. We don't have that in North Carolina. We're all treated the same, which is insane. So in Georgia, if you own a house in Savannah, but you live in Kansas City, you're taxed at a higher rate than somebody that lives in a Savannah house. Owner -occupied is totally different than non -owner -occupied. In North Carolina, we don't even have that protection. So it's even worse for us. So it's maddening. So anyway, anybody that's on this podcast that lives in a tourist town, like this is one of the things that should be the top of your agenda to talk about. It's like, I'm not saying don't do it. You we're a tourist town. Our baseball team is called the Asheville Tourists. Got it. Been the Asheville Tourists since the 1920s. This is our economy. But don't tax them less. That's crazy. Yeah. Kevin K (42:00.068) Interesting. Kevin K (42:24.443) Understand what they are, tax them, or have some policy that makes sense. Yeah. Yeah, no doubt. So one of the other things that you've been able to do with your work then is kind of related to all this. You get the chance to like dive deep into the history of especially like property taxation and other things. And I know you've read a lot of stuff in this world. How has Joe Minicozzi (42:28.746) It's a commodity, right? What does that do to housing prices? Kevin K (42:51.269) kind of impacted the work that you're doing or you're thinking, or what are some notable things that you've seen and just looking back a long time ago when a lot of these rules were being formulated. Joe Minicozzi (43:01.75) Yeah, there's some. One of the things about new urbanists, it's kind of weird. I hate that term because we're sort of just urban thinkers. We're complex thinkers. Joe Minicozzi (43:19.68) It's not new. This is just, we're operating in an urban environment, we're going to be interrogating things, but we tend to lean toward, if it's broke, fix it. That's our attitude. And it shouldn't take forever. But we also swim upstream to try to figure out who put this fence in. So who put the fence out in that field? And why is that fence there? And if the fence serves a purpose, keep the fence. If the fence was there for just because some random situation, get rid of it. It's like unnecessary policy. So you'll hear within our cluster of crazy friends, a lot of us are just like, rid of parking standards. Why do you need them? Why do we have trip counts for highways? Because when you look at the base data of trip counts, it doesn't make sense. Plus, since pandemic, we've changed the way that our commute patterns operate. So we should be changing our math. And like we operate faster with a level of, with trying to stop the bleeding, if you will. We're triage people, you know, we're like the emergency room medics. But we're also going to go upstream to figure out how did this start? So just for, you know, I started to see a lot of patterns in the assessment maps of how neighborhoods were construed or different market areas that lined up with redlining. And so redlining started in 1934 and went to 1968 and was deemed unconstitutional. But if you go to Mapping Inequality website, you actually find that there's maps that predate redlining that the bankers were using that was essentially racist. That if you were an immigrant or in a black neighborhood, they deemed you high risk and they changed your ability to get cashflow. Redlining was adopted at a federal level. So it's federal policy that said this is the rule of the land now, which makes it pernicious. It was already pernicious before, but for the federal government to come in and say, we're going to be unconstitutional here is pretty bad. But to everybody's credit, everybody's hands got slapped in 1968, that changed. Well, here we are today and we're still seeing the same effects in the valuation that models very similarly to redlining. So I was just like, well, maybe there's got to be a book somewhere that this is all talked about in the Joe Minicozzi (45:41.816) I found this book from 1922. It's the ninth edition. So was actually the first edition was 1895. So think about this, a book was reprinted nine times because it was so popular. It's called The Essays and Taxation by Edwin Seligman. And I love this quote. So just for the radio audience, just turn on your mind to 1895. This is what he wrote. Practically, the general property tax is actually administered as beyond all doubt, one of the worst tax systems known to the civilized world. Because of its attempt to tax intangible as well as tangible things, it sins against the cardinal rules of uniformity, of equality, and of universality and taxation. It puts a premium on dishonesty and debauches the public's conscience. It reduces deception to a system and makes a science of navery. It presses hardest on those least able to pay and imposes double taxation on one man and grants entire immunity on the next. In short, the general property tax system is so flagrantly inequitable that its retention can only be explained through ignorance and inertia. It is the cause of such crying injustice that its alteration or its abolishment must become the battle cry of every statesman and reformer." So this is somebody who works in taxation and goes, this is a crock of junk. Let's get rid of this. And that was over a hundred years ago, right? And so now I sat in a two hour meeting. with my assessors and their consultant going through is excruciating detail, all of this crazy mathematics. I'm like, why are we doing it this way? I understand what you're doing, but let's take a big step up. Why do we finance cities this way? Why is it based on value? know, Kevin, you and I are trained as architects, right? We want to do beautiful buildings. We want to do, if I could afford it, I would build a stone house, you know, because I like stone and it lasts forever. So I create an asset that will be in the community for hundreds and hundreds of years paying taxes. Why would you penalize me for that? You should be charging me on how often I drive on that road and how many times I use a fire call. Charge me for the services you provide rather than some arbitrary, hey, you built a stone house, therefore you pay more taxes. You could be right next door to me in a tin shack and have actually more income than me. Joe Minicozzi (48:09.944) and be taxed less because you have a tin shack and I've got a stone house. I could be making $50 ,000 a year and you're making $200 How is that fair? This is where I said that the income tax is a little bit more fair, but the thing is if you're really rich, you're not making income. You've got assets, right? Those are all hidden somewhere, not being taxed. So there's no perfect systems. That's why we advocate, and you see in our models, those red -black models where you have Black is producing wealth, net positive, red is net subsidy. And we did that for Springfield. 80 % of the city is subsidized. So just show that to the citizens and just be like, this is how we're subsidizing it. Is this the best choice? But you should charge me for it. If there's, yeah, go ahead. No, Kevin K (48:52.091) So when you do this, go ahead. I was going say when you do that kind of historic research, it, I mean have to ask the Georgist question, does that, how do you think about that relative to the Henry George critique, the land value tax approach versus the standard property tax that we do in most places? Joe Minicozzi (49:11.16) I mean, I think that aligns with Henry George, the statement. It aligns with how I feel as a taxpayer and also as somebody that practices in this world. The more we get into this with the Cessars, I have all the respect in the world for what they do because we do all of our work on their data. So I'm very thankful for them as a profession. But I also see that they're trapped. in a construction of their own making, the same way that traffic engineers are. And for anybody that's on this podcast that's read Confessions of a Recovering Engineer by Chuck Marrone, I mean, he nails it. That same ethos in that book is the same ethos I see with the zoning people that are all just about zoning. This is the way the zoning is, as if some omnipotent force gave them the zoning, you know? And then there's the same as I see this with the assessors, where I always ask them, I'm like, why is that the standard? Where did this come Like today when this one assessor was telling me that legally they can't assess Airbnbs as commercial. So I immediately asked her, I'm like, can you show me the law that says that? And she just went blank. And I was like, you just told me that there was a law that this, so tell me the law. And they don't, this is their bias. This is their practice. This is their fear. They're afraid to stir up the people that are out there with Airbnbs. I'm like, that's not what the law says. So you're making a choice not to do that. There's so much... Joe Minicozzi (50:43.129) discretion that people don't talk about. You see this when you talk to old school planners that are just like, the trip counts and the parking requirement, their bias kind of comes in. They won't call it a bias. Kevin K (50:56.197) Yeah, yeah. And I think we've often talked about that. And I think Jeff Speck famously wrote about that. You can manipulate a traffic study to say whatever you want it to say. And it's really just about the choices that you're making of what you want to do or what you want the outcome to be. Joe Minicozzi (51:14.12) We did a land analysis. Back to Henry George, we did a land value analysis where we just turn off all the buildings and just look at the land value per acre. This was in Cheyenne, Wyoming. The larger parcels in the commercial strip area were half the value of the out parcels across the street. I asked, I'm like, does land magically lose half its value when you cross the street? Same zoning category. And the tax assessor told me with all confidence, she goes, well, the cheaper one is bigger. The more land you have, the lower the value. And it's like, what economic rule is that true? And she goes, there's less people that can afford large tracts of land. So therefore we have to give a discount because there's less people in the marketplace. And I was like, well, that's kind of true. But does that work this way with other limited commodities like diamonds? If I get a bigger diamond, is it cheaper? Surely there's less people that can afford a bigger And everybody in the room was laughing, but she was just totally confused by that. And the weird thing is that I don't have an economics degree. I've actually never taken an economics course. So I just asked a question because I'm curious about this stuff. Kevin K (52:23.323) Yeah. So Joe, you've also been working a little bit in Annapolis, Maryland, which is obviously a really, really different context than Springfield, Missouri, one of the oldest cities in the country. wonder if you want to talk a little bit about what you've been doing there and what you're seeing. Joe Minicozzi (52:40.376) Yeah, Annapolis is cool. We did one of those red -black models for them. And one of the things that we noticed was their annexation pattern was an interesting tell. It's kind of funny. like, I've got a picture for that, but it's kind of hard to talk about a picture in this space. I'll Kevin K (53:03.387) Well, eventually, eventually this will be a YouTube thing too at some point. So we could do Joe Minicozzi (53:08.696) Yeah. from one of the things you could see in the, again, we talked about at the start of this about Kansas City, there's tells in the annexation pattern that tell you the problems that you're having today. So it's kind of like, you and I are the same age. I'm 56. There's things that I'm dealing with today in my body that didn't happen because of what I did last week. It happened because of stuff I did when I was in high school, right? The older you get, like all of a sudden it's like, my ACL gave out. Why is that? It was because I played football in high school. So it's like, just took a while for that ligament to just finally give. I can remember the concussion that I had when that happened. You know, it's like things like that. So we look at cities the same way as what did you do in your past that you're now seeing the problems today? So. One of the rules that we all know is roads only last about 50 years. so every 50 years is when you have your heart attack based on what you did when you first built those roads. Annapolis did 71 % of its land acquisition. So if you look at it today and just say, if we make a pie chart of this, when did these areas break down? Their first hundred years is 4 % of their land. for their first 100 years. From 1920 to 1800, that's 80 years, they did 5 % growth, okay? So that was 120 years. In just the year of 1951, they annexed 71 % of their land. So let that wash over you. Just imagine the pie in your mind of 4%, 5%, and then 71 % in one year. So those developments didn't all happen in 1971. would take a while from the late 50s, early 60s when you start to fill in all of those subdivisions, you're filling in a lot of lane miles in 71 % of your city. So those roads are now being replaced now in the 2020s, 2030s. And they're looking at, let's see, kind of try to do the quick math here. They're looking Joe Minicozzi (55:34.264) close to. two thirds of their roads are coming due because of that original sin of that annexation. But the habit in the 1950s, I think about that. People come back from the war, we're like, we're going to be modern. There's all these policies in place to reward this, the federal highway system, the FHA loans. And it's not that people had ill intent, they just were naive. They're just like, well, let's try something different. Let's kind of remake cities. And this is what we're dealing with. It's like we have to kind of think back to when that happened. So we show them the And you can see their jaws drop when I was showing this to them. And it's kind of like walking in and I'm the doctor, we just got a bunch of CAT scans and I show you your broken shoulder. I'm like, is the reason why you can't pick things up. You've got your shoulders broken. And everybody can see it because you can see it on the map. 71 % is a lot of area in one year. Kevin K (56:27.023) Yeah. What is some of the examples of how some of your clients have reacted to information when you're finally at the end? I would imagine it runs the gamut from complete denial to people excited to make some change. mean, what do you see on the back end of doing these analysis? Joe Minicozzi (56:49.196) You know, the mayor actually called me yesterday. I was bicycling into work and I get this telephone call from Annapolis and it's him and he's so excited. And he goes, it's it's hard. It's indescribable. We're all singing from the same sheet of music now. And so, you know, in respect for politicians, and I don't, I don't mean this in a, in a, as, negative as this is going to sound, but think about, let's, let's just kind of make it blunt. You win a popularity contest and you become mayor. That's it. That's the American system of government right there. They don't have the master's degree in urban design. They don't have the research of 30 years of public policy analysis and parking requirements. They don't have that junk shoved in their heads the way that you and I do. So they just win this popularity contest and they're trying to figure things out. their commerce is what they hear from people, the emotions, the conversations, how people react to their day -to -day living. It's sort of on us as professionals to help demystify that. So that's basically, that's the MO of our company is we're going to try to find a way to give you a lot of quantitative data, but we're going to do it in a way that's easy to understand and give you a pie chart. You know, it's like, we're not going to make that hard. You know, it's just, it is. This is what's going on. Here's that pie chart showing you 71%. is in that one year, they've had that data since 1951. It's like, it shouldn't be magic to pull this stuff out. So it really is on the professional to do that. So usually what we get is we see a game. He's right. We do see a game change from people because we've created a graphic that people can see and they can see what's going on. You can't argue against the pie chart. There it is. 71%. It's like there's data. There's a pie chart so everybody can see how big that is. Just make it simple. We don't hand you an 85 page document explaining it all in text. Why? 65 % of the audience are visual learners. Show them a picture. So once we did that and kind of walk them through and help them understand, they could see their city with new eyes. That's actually another quote that a mayor gave me in Davis, California. He goes, it's as if I've never been to this city called Davis and I could see it with new eyes Joe Minicozzi (59:16.886) So it's respecting them and honoring that their life is hard. Their role is near impossible. They've got to learn how a multi -billion dollar corporation operates the night after the election. And there's all of these habits baked into it. how do we short circuit that and make it easy for people to move? So we've seen changes. We've seen Rancho Cucamonga, California. They adopted a one to six rule for their downtown as an area to value ratio. So now they have like a two drink minimum, if you will. And there was a steel manufacturing company that came in for a tax break. And the assistant city manager told me, goes, you know, it's fun is after we did this math with you all, he goes, they came in and asked for a tax break and they're a big employer. But then I compared them on a per acre basis to other manufacturing plants in our city, these smaller ones, and they were actually way more beneficial than this big one. So I told the big one to take a hike. And it was like, that made my month. It's like, I couldn't believe he did that. But it was like, we gave them a new language to understand themselves. And as a consultant, it's like, yeah, I wasn't there for the win, but I feel proud of that. It's not sexy to talk about, but it's like, that's cool. So there's not as much satisfaction as being an architect when somebody lives in a house that you produce, but it's a different kind of satisfaction. Kevin K (01:00:52.003) Yeah, I really like the analogy of, it's almost like you're providing an MRI or a CAT scan. You're the doctor giving them critical information about the health of their community. And then really it's up to them to decide, do they want to correct that health or not? Joe Minicozzi (01:01:11.606) Well, it's value statement of our company too, that the doctor doesn't blame the patient. And so if you're going in and you're a smoker, chronic smoker your entire life, the doctor knows you're an addict. But what can the doctor provide you to help you get past your addiction? So the doctor is going to show you an MRI of your lungs and you're going to see the black spots all over the lungs. The doctor is going to be like, guess where that's coming from? Kevin K (01:01:14.083) Okay. Joe Minicozzi (01:01:40.128) and you'll say, it's my smoking. It'll be like, yeah, you want to keep doing it? It's up on you. I'm not going to be able to pull a cigarette out of your hand, but I have to do what I can to give you information to be an educated consumer. So that's kind of our MO. Kevin K (01:01:54.821) Joe, I think that's a great place to wrap. And if people are looking to find you and your company, what's the best place to go? Joe Minicozzi (01:02:06.552) Urban3 .com, three is all spelled out. You can also, there's plenty of videos online that you can Google through YouTube. My favorite one is the one that Not Just Bikes did on our work. Not Just Bikes is just a great resource for lots of information on city planning. And also Strong Towns covers a lot of our work. And also the Congress for New Urbanism. If anybody wants to come to a conference, the Congress for New Urbanism or the Strong Towns Gatherings are great. Or if you want to go deep nerd, we're like at the Government Finance Officers Association conferences every year. That's a whole lot of fun. So yeah, we'll see you around in public and thank you for doing all of Kevin K (01:02:54.405) Yeah, so really appreciate it, Joe. I'm sure we'll do some more in the future, but this is a great introduction for anybody who doesn't know your work. And also for those who do, I really appreciate the deeper dive. So hang in there. Keep doing what you're doing. And we'll talk again. All right. Joe Minicozzi (01:03:13.25) Thanks. Get full access to The Messy City at kevinklinkenberg.substack.com/subscribe

Henry George's Progress and Poverty was one of the best-selling books of the 19th century, and his ideas were taken up by by powerful figures as diverse as Sun Yat-sen, Leo Tolstoy, and Theodor Herzl. Yet, in the 21st century, George is often reduced to a footnote in the history of the Gilded Age. In Land and Liberty: Henry George and the Crafting of Modern Liberalism (Johns Hopkins UP, 2023), Christopher William England uncovers the influence of Georgism in the 19th and 20th centuries, and the movement's contributions to American liberalism. In surveying George's devotees and their impacts at the municipal and national levels, England demonstrates that George's ideas were pivotal in reconciling liberalism to a democratic welfare state. In this episode, we discuss George's land value tax, domestic and international Georgist movements, and the influence of Progress and Poverty on American and British liberalism. Reed Schwartz (@reedschwartzsf) is an MPhil student in Intellectual History at the University of Cambridge. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Henry George's Progress and Poverty was one of the best-selling books of the 19th century, and his ideas were taken up by by powerful figures as diverse as Sun Yat-sen, Leo Tolstoy, and Theodor Herzl. Yet, in the 21st century, George is often reduced to a footnote in the history of the Gilded Age. In Land and Liberty: Henry George and the Crafting of Modern Liberalism (Johns Hopkins UP, 2023), Christopher William England uncovers the influence of Georgism in the 19th and 20th centuries, and the movement's contributions to American liberalism. In surveying George's devotees and their impacts at the municipal and national levels, England demonstrates that George's ideas were pivotal in reconciling liberalism to a democratic welfare state. In this episode, we discuss George's land value tax, domestic and international Georgist movements, and the influence of Progress and Poverty on American and British liberalism. Reed Schwartz (@reedschwartzsf) is an MPhil student in Intellectual History at the University of Cambridge. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Henry George's Progress and Poverty was one of the best-selling books of the 19th century, and his ideas were taken up by by powerful figures as diverse as Sun Yat-sen, Leo Tolstoy, and Theodor Herzl. Yet, in the 21st century, George is often reduced to a footnote in the history of the Gilded Age. In Land and Liberty: Henry George and the Crafting of Modern Liberalism (Johns Hopkins UP, 2023), Christopher William England uncovers the influence of Georgism in the 19th and 20th centuries, and the movement's contributions to American liberalism. In surveying George's devotees and their impacts at the municipal and national levels, England demonstrates that George's ideas were pivotal in reconciling liberalism to a democratic welfare state. In this episode, we discuss George's land value tax, domestic and international Georgist movements, and the influence of Progress and Poverty on American and British liberalism. Reed Schwartz (@reedschwartzsf) is an MPhil student in Intellectual History at the University of Cambridge. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

Henry George's Progress and Poverty was one of the best-selling books of the 19th century, and his ideas were taken up by by powerful figures as diverse as Sun Yat-sen, Leo Tolstoy, and Theodor Herzl. Yet, in the 21st century, George is often reduced to a footnote in the history of the Gilded Age. In Land and Liberty: Henry George and the Crafting of Modern Liberalism (Johns Hopkins UP, 2023), Christopher William England uncovers the influence of Georgism in the 19th and 20th centuries, and the movement's contributions to American liberalism. In surveying George's devotees and their impacts at the municipal and national levels, England demonstrates that George's ideas were pivotal in reconciling liberalism to a democratic welfare state. In this episode, we discuss George's land value tax, domestic and international Georgist movements, and the influence of Progress and Poverty on American and British liberalism. Reed Schwartz (@reedschwartzsf) is an MPhil student in Intellectual History at the University of Cambridge. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/biography

Henry George's Progress and Poverty was one of the best-selling books of the 19th century, and his ideas were taken up by by powerful figures as diverse as Sun Yat-sen, Leo Tolstoy, and Theodor Herzl. Yet, in the 21st century, George is often reduced to a footnote in the history of the Gilded Age. In Land and Liberty: Henry George and the Crafting of Modern Liberalism (Johns Hopkins UP, 2023), Christopher William England uncovers the influence of Georgism in the 19th and 20th centuries, and the movement's contributions to American liberalism. In surveying George's devotees and their impacts at the municipal and national levels, England demonstrates that George's ideas were pivotal in reconciling liberalism to a democratic welfare state. In this episode, we discuss George's land value tax, domestic and international Georgist movements, and the influence of Progress and Poverty on American and British liberalism. Reed Schwartz (@reedschwartzsf) is an MPhil student in Intellectual History at the University of Cambridge. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Henry George's Progress and Poverty was one of the best-selling books of the 19th century, and his ideas were taken up by by powerful figures as diverse as Sun Yat-sen, Leo Tolstoy, and Theodor Herzl. Yet, in the 21st century, George is often reduced to a footnote in the history of the Gilded Age. In Land and Liberty: Henry George and the Crafting of Modern Liberalism (Johns Hopkins UP, 2023), Christopher William England uncovers the influence of Georgism in the 19th and 20th centuries, and the movement's contributions to American liberalism. In surveying George's devotees and their impacts at the municipal and national levels, England demonstrates that George's ideas were pivotal in reconciling liberalism to a democratic welfare state. In this episode, we discuss George's land value tax, domestic and international Georgist movements, and the influence of Progress and Poverty on American and British liberalism. Reed Schwartz (@reedschwartzsf) is an MPhil student in Intellectual History at the University of Cambridge. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

Henry George's Progress and Poverty was one of the best-selling books of the 19th century, and his ideas were taken up by by powerful figures as diverse as Sun Yat-sen, Leo Tolstoy, and Theodor Herzl. Yet, in the 21st century, George is often reduced to a footnote in the history of the Gilded Age. In Land and Liberty: Henry George and the Crafting of Modern Liberalism (Johns Hopkins UP, 2023), Christopher William England uncovers the influence of Georgism in the 19th and 20th centuries, and the movement's contributions to American liberalism. In surveying George's devotees and their impacts at the municipal and national levels, England demonstrates that George's ideas were pivotal in reconciling liberalism to a democratic welfare state. In this episode, we discuss George's land value tax, domestic and international Georgist movements, and the influence of Progress and Poverty on American and British liberalism. Reed Schwartz (@reedschwartzsf) is an MPhil student in Intellectual History at the University of Cambridge. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Henry George's Progress and Poverty was one of the best-selling books of the 19th century, and his ideas were taken up by by powerful figures as diverse as Sun Yat-sen, Leo Tolstoy, and Theodor Herzl. Yet, in the 21st century, George is often reduced to a footnote in the history of the Gilded Age. In Land and Liberty: Henry George and the Crafting of Modern Liberalism (Johns Hopkins UP, 2023), Christopher William England uncovers the influence of Georgism in the 19th and 20th centuries, and the movement's contributions to American liberalism. In surveying George's devotees and their impacts at the municipal and national levels, England demonstrates that George's ideas were pivotal in reconciling liberalism to a democratic welfare state. In this episode, we discuss George's land value tax, domestic and international Georgist movements, and the influence of Progress and Poverty on American and British liberalism. Reed Schwartz (@reedschwartzsf) is an MPhil student in Intellectual History at the University of Cambridge. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today our discussion comes from our most recent seminar “The Rise of Automation and AI – Curse or Blessing for the Working Class?” and was recorded in May of 2024. Our Talk is hosted by our Director of Education, Ibrahima Drame, who is joined by Dr. Sandeep Sacheti, Dr. Ansel Schiavone, and Mr. Ed Dodson. Dr. Sandeep is an Executive Vice President at Wolters Kluwer, an IT and software company for professional services. He received his doctorate from UC Berkeley and has 20 patents in decision science, fraud verification, and identification. Dr. Ansel Schiavone is an economics professor at St. John's University where he researches inequality, microeconomics, and the political economy. He received his bachelor's degree from Dension University and his PhD from the University of Utah, both in economics. Mr. Dodson attended Shippensburg University and Temple University where he received his economics degree. Ed was also a manager at Fannie Mae. Edward is also the author of a three-volume book series titled The Discovery of First Principles. Together we discussed why AI won't replace as many jobs as we think, how Neo-classical labor models fail to hold up in the real world, and the Georgist perspective on how AI would impact labor throughout the economy.  To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smart-talk-hgsss/support

Christopher England is the author of "Land and Liberty: Henry George and the Crafting of Modern Liberalism", a history of the land reform movement in the time of Henry George and after‒today on the program, we talk about the contours of the political strategy and history covered in this text, in particular the make-or-break years of 1900-1920. How were "the interests" addressed, and what lessons does this have for us today?

Dr. Rowland served in the New York City Department of Parks and Recreation as a Senior Project Manager for Environmental Remediation to help the city improve environmental quality. He has taught at various institutions, such as Pace University and here at the Henry George School of Social Science. He is also a Senior Fellow with the Asset Leadership Network, a group that promotes financial awareness to achieve social objectives. Dr. Marty Rowland earned his bachelor's degree from the University of Michigan and his master's from the University of New Orleans, both in Environmental Engineering. He later went on to earn his Ph.D. in Natural Resource Economics from the University of New Orleans as well. We were joined by Dr. Rowland to discuss Henry George's work on monetary policy and central banking, some critiques of George's analysis, and the difference between metal-backed currencies versus fiat currencies.  To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smart-talk-hgsss/support

This episode of Economics Explored features a deep dive into the ongoing housing crisis in Australia with John August, a Pirate Party of Australia official and Sydney radio host. Gene and John discuss the significant influence of immigration rates and building restrictions on housing availability and prices. They also consider potential policy solutions to ensure more equitable housing access, including developing a charter city named Turing. Please contact us with any questions, comments and suggestions by emailing us at contact@economicsexplored.com or sending a voice message via https://www.speakpipe.com/economicsexplored. About this episode's guest: John AugustJohn August is the Treasurer of the Pirate Party Australia. John does computer support work in retail and shareholder communication. He is passionate about justice and ethics in our world, particularly as it plays out in law generally and intellectual property in particular. He has stood on behalf of the Pirate Party in the Federal seat of Bennelong and also as a Councillor for Ryde City Council.Along with technology and law John is also interested in spoken word and poetry. He broadcasts on community radio and hosts the program “Roving Spotlight” on Tuesdays from noon-2pm on Radio Skid Row Marrickville Sydney, and writes about his ideas on the website www.johnaugust.com.au. You can keep up to date with what John is up to via his Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100063805005395What's covered in EP236Introduction. (0:00)Housing crisis in Australia, with a focus on supply and demand issues, affordability, and government policies. (2:44)Population growth, immigration, infrastructure, and housing affordability in Australia. (8:04)Housing affordability and land value taxation. (13:40)A Georgist approach to taxing land. (22:05)Immigration and foreign aid in Australia. (31:24)Reducing immigration and addressing housing challenges in Australia. (37:46)Immigration policy, infrastructure, and zoning regulations in Australia. (41:45)Potential for charter cities (e.g. Turing) and high-speed rail links. (47:34)Foreign aid, shipping, and taxation. (53:35)TakeawaysThe housing crisis in Australia is exacerbated by high immigration levels and stringent building restrictions, which affect affordability.Policy debates are intensifying around whether to restrict immigration to ease housing demand or to relax zoning restrictions on development to boost supply.The concept of "upzoning," similar to Auckland's approach, could be a viable solution to create more housing in existing urban areas.Proponents of high immigration levels often overlook the infrastructural and social costs associated with a rapidly increasing population through high immigration rates.The discussion of housing involves not only economic metrics but also the quality of life and housing accessibility for all population segments.Links relevant to the conversationLeith Van Onselen on immigration and housing: https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2024/04/albo-lies-his-way-out-of-rental-crisis/Previous episode with Natalie Rayment: https://queenslandeconomywatch.com/2021/04/16/missing-middle-housing-podcast-chat-with-natalie-rayment-of-wolter-consulting/John's conversation with Cameron Murray on housing: https://www.mixcloud.com/Johnorg/roving-spotlight-28-november-reviewing-a-pirate-look-at-the-housing-market-with-cameron-murray/Freightened documentary about the cost of shipping: https://thoughtmaybe.com/freightened/Lumo Coffee promotionLumo Coffee Discount: Visit Lumo Coffee (lumocoffee.com) and use code EXPLORED20 for a 20% discount until April 30, 2024.Thanks to Obsidian Productions for mixing the episode and to the show's sponsor, Gene's consultancy business www.adepteconomics.com.au. Full transcripts are available a few days after the episode is first published at www.economicsexplored.com.

Hey BlurtstarsOn Blurt Around The World tonight!* Who turned out the lights? We'll bring you the latest photos and videos of the total solar eclipse that crossed Mexico, USA and Canada.* Government protects something.* The new “crookie” has hit town. Is it any good?* Recruits wanted for counting penguins in Antarctica. Job for Wencee?Then we will revisit Covid. The Kegsta will cover the guy who tries to use covid as an excuse for drug dealing court and Wencee will tell us if there is a link between Covid and Shingles.And to round out the show on Great People That Did Stuff Wencee will talk about Lizzie Magie and the Kegsta will blurt about Nicholas Winton.Nearly forgot Joke of the Week. So if you got any funnies post them in as you can guarantee they will be better than ours :)So, let's get on with the show!!Tune in and find out more on https://www.youtube.com/@thenewblurt7773, with Wencee and the Kegsta.Subscribe to our newsletter: https://thenewblurt.substack.com or contact us at blurtstar[at]gmail.com.Blurt Around The WorldThe total solar eclipse of 8 April 2024 crossed Mexico, USA and Canada. If you missed it from where you live, here are some links to relive the spectacular celestial event. The link below is the official NASA broadcast live stream that occurred during the solar eclipse →YouTube NASA Official | 2024 Total Solar Eclipse: Through the Eyes of NASA (Official Broadcast)The following Google Slides link is what we used during the show →Collation of images from the official NASA eclipse stream as a slideshowThe following links show the sun's shadow traversing the Earth as seen from space →YouTube NASA | Chasing the 2024 Total Solar Eclipse With NASA JetsYouTube ABC (USA) News | How the International Space Station viewed the 2024 total eclipseStart planning the total solar eclipse that crosses Australia on 22 July, 2028 →Astronomical Society of Australia | Detailed map of the eclipse path over AustraliaThe federal Environment minister rejects a major residential and commercial development in Moreton Bay, South East Queensland. This is to protect the endangered Eastern Curlew →Guardian News | Tanya Plibersek rejects Toondah Harbour project over impact on globally significant wetlandsWhat is a crookie, we hear? If you're up for adventure to try the cookie inside a croissant, pay a visit to the Surrey Hills bakery in Sydney to see if' it's worth your tastebuds →Guardian News | Le crookie lands in Australia: does the cookie-croissant hybrid live up to the hype?Fancy a cool job counting penguin populations in Antarctica? Well, if you live in the UK, you could be one of five people to apply for the UK Antarctic Heritage Trust →NDTV | "Job Like No Other": Recruits Wanted For Counting Penguins In AntarcticaCovidIt's been a while since we spoke about Covid as we are now “living with Covid” in society now. But one Sydney sider is still blaming Covid for his drug trafficking →ABC News | Sydney man Kevin Song blames COVID-19 after being caught with ice and $40,000 cashIs there a link between Covid-19 and Shingles? Since Covid-19 appeared, there has been an increase in Shingles cases in Australia compared to previous years. Perhaps some people's immunity has been lowered after getting Covid. But more research needs to be done to determine if there is a real link →ABC News | Shingles cases are increasing in New South Wales. Experts say COVID might be whyFor more information about when to get your next Covid vaccine, check out the federal Australian health information →Department of Health and Aged Care | COVID-19 vaccine advice and recommendations for 2024Great People That Did StuffElizabeth J. Magie also known as Lizzie Magie, was an American game designer, writer, feminist, and Georgist. She created a games called The Landlord's Game. But her game was stolen by Charles Darrow and made into Monopoly. Read more about her story here →New York Times | Overlooked No More: Lizzie Magie, the Unknown Inventor Behind MonopolyThe Public Domain Review | The Landlord's Game: Lizzie Magie and Monopoly's Anti-Capitalist Origins (1903)National Women's History Museum | Monopoly's Lost Female InventorNicholas Winton was a British stockbroker who, in a heroic act, organized the rescue of 669 mostly Jewish children from Czechoslovakia on the brink of World War II. Despite saving these children from the Holocaust, he remained humble about his actions for most of his life. →Guardian News | How Nicholas Winton saved 669 children (and counting) from the Holocaust: ‘He became everybody's grandfather'Wikipedia | Nicholas WintonA new movie about Nicholas Winton is available on Google TV →YouTube Warner Bros. | One Life – Official Trailer - Warner Bros. UK & IrelandFollow us on our socials:YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@thenewblurt7773Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/blurtstar/Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/blurtstar/Twitter - @BlurtNewThreads - https://www.threads.net/@blurtstar This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit thenewblurt.substack.com

Today's discussion was recorded in September of 2021, where we were joined by our returning guest, and long-time faculty member of the school, Ed Dodson. Mr. Dodson attended Shippensburg University and Temple University where he received an economics degree. Ed worked for Fannie Mae, a public-private partnership to help distribute home mortgage loans. During his time at Fannie Mae, Mr. Dodson held numerous management and analyst positions within the Housing & Community Development group, helping to revitalize neighborhoods and local communities. This gives him an interesting perspective on land use and reform, and how it can reduce inequality. He also has extensive experience as a history lecturer at the Osher Life Long Learning Institute and the Learning is For Everyone program at Burlington County College. Edward has written many papers on history and the political economy and is the author of a three-volume book series titled The Discovery of First Principles. Today, Mr. Dodson explains the impact of the American Rescue plan, and why it may not have helped the people it was most intended to. Ed helps break down a Georgist analysis of the macroenvironment pre-Covid, and how the American Rescue Plan fails to address its vulnerabilities.  To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smart-talk-hgsss/support

Wes, Eneasz, and David keep the rationalist community informed about what's going on outside of the rationalist communitySupport us on Substack!News discussed:Alabama passed a law protecting IVF providers from liabilityAnti-abortion groups are not happy about itPutin threatens nukes if western troops used, againSCOTUS voted 9-0 to allow Trump on the BallotBiden gave a big speech and didn't sound too old!Congress swamped with calls to not ban TikTok after TikTok mobilized users with easy “call now” button. Trump flipped flopped and is pro-TikTok now after meeting with a big TikTok investorWendy's introduces dynamic pricingElon Musk is suing OpenAI for not being open enough and being too much AIElon TweetsUS evacuates Haitian embassy staff amid gang violenceOregon re-criminalized drugs after downtown turned into a nightmareGaza Ministry of Health blatantly fakes casualty numbersSpanish soldiers change genderClaude 3 gets ~60% accuracy on GPQAneedle-in-the-haystack evalHumanoid robot startup Figure AI valued at $2.6B as Bezos, OpenAI, Nvidia invest $675MHappy News!Sacramento eliminated exclusionary zoningFrance makes history by enshrining abortion rights in its constitutionDetroit is considering Georgist land value taxes!CDC's new COVID guidance now matches public health advice for flu and other respiratory illnessesFDA approves a drug for frostbiteGarbage collectors came across a fire. 49yo Steve Whitehouse climbed up to a 2nd-floor balcony three times to rescue a man, a woman, and their dog, before firefighters arrived.Zvi: “We Can't Help But Notice” AI postAnthropic postGot something to say? Come chat with us on the Bayesian Conspiracy Discord or email us at themindkillerpodcast@gmail.com. Say something smart and we'll mention you on the next show!Follow us!RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/themindkillerGoogle: https://play.google.com/music/listen#/ps/Iqs7r7t6cdxw465zdulvwikhekmPocket Casts: https://pca.st/vvcmifu6 Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/the-mind-killer Apple: Intro/outro music: On Sale by Golden Duck Orchestra This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit mindkiller.substack.com/subscribe

In this episode we look at the American Planning Association's 2024 Trend Report for Planners. We look at their housing, politics, and climate sections among others. The report leaves a lot to be desired. Correction: I meant to say 1924/1920 when referring to the Georgist presidential candidates, not 2024/2020. Subscribe to the Patreon for $2 per month! You'll get access to bonus episodes, livestreams, the Discord server, and more!Josh's YouTube channel, Radical Planning. The podcast Instagram where I mostly just post pictures of Mimi the cat. The podcast website - it's cute and functions fairly well! The podcast Tumblr. God has abandoned this place. The podcast YouTube. Mostly episode uploads, but sometimes other stuff too!

Today's discussion came from our archives and was recorded in July of 2023. Our talk is hosted by Ed Dodson, a long-time faculty member here at the Henry George School, who is joined by our guest Mr. Lars Doucet. Mr. Doucet is a consultant, blogger, entrepreneur, game developer, and currently the Director of Outreach for Common Ground USA. As a consultant, Lars has been accredited with developing numerous video games and software packages, such as Defender's Quest and Super Energy Apocalypse. He is also the founder of Geo Land Solutions, which appraises large tracts of land to better calibrate land values and taxes more equitably. Mr. Doucet recently published his first book: Land is a Big Deal, where he explores Georgist ideas, such as rent, natural resource extraction, and collectivism.   As economies move away from being mostly industrial, they grow in complexity. You've probably heard of financialization, the phenomenon of how finance becomes increasingly intertwined with the real economy. But this is only one layer to this growing complexity. Technology has also changed the economy, everything is becoming digitalized as analog machines and processes become obsolete. All of this adds up to a highly complex economy that becomes increasingly hard to understand and comprehend. Older economic models were once capable of understanding the economy in its less complex form. But as technology and the economy become more advanced, these frameworks and analyses becoming increasingly similar to the “vulgar economics” we talked about last week. These models are often linear, can't capture human or societal behavior, and fail to predict crises. Critics of mainstream economics, like Mr. Doucet or, most prominently, Steve Keen, advocate for a new framework for our economic models. One new method embraces “system dynamics”, a computer science and mathematical modeling technique showing how actors within complex systems, say industrial workers in a factory, interact with other fixtures or incentives in the system. Unlike other frameworks, proponents of system dynamics believe these models can better understand how feedback loops are created, how changes in incentives or behaviors lead to changes in the system as a whole, or how dynamic or evolutionary the economy is. As a video game designer, Lars created educational games that utilize system dynamics. When observing the games he designed, Lars often noticed how the economy in the game would lead to recessions or economic downturns. With an understanding of how the system would work, Mr. Doucet would then suggest changes similar to Georgist policy that would then ameliorate the recession. This led him to better understand the importance of Georgist policy in our complex world.   Mr. Doucet earned his bachelor's and master's degrees from Texas A&M University in Visual Sciences.   Together, we discussed how Mr. Doucet came to his Georgist epiphany, how speculation leads to inequality and economic downturns, and how proper appraisal of land values can lead to beneficial downstream effects. To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smart-talk-hgsss/support

Today's discussion came from our archives and was recorded in June of 2023. Our talk is hosted by Ed Dodson, a long-time faculty member here at the Henry George School, who is joined by our returning guest Mr. Mark Mollineaux. Mark is an artist, radio host, and researcher who focuses on metropolitan resilience, urbanization, and housing affordability. Mr. Mollineaux is a lifelong Georgist and hosts a popular radio show, The Henry George Program, on Stanford's radio where he hosts discussions on Georgist ideas and concepts. He is also part of Common Ground USA's California Chapter. Common Ground USA promotes land and economic justice through land-value taxation, land trusts, and fair taxation of pollution or extraction. In the 19th century, Karl Marx published his seminal book, Das Kapital, where he critiques the political economy. In this work, Marx coined the term “vulgar economics” or “vulgar economy”, which was a dig at frameworks created by other economists. However, vulgar economics also criticizes assumptions made by pure observations. To Marx, economists had to conceptualize more than just what they saw. Today, this can be directly linked to the supply and demand analysis utilized by most major economists.   When analyzing factors such as labor or land, it helps to build a more complex understanding of how these factors of production synergize with the rest of the economy. Our guest today helps us do just that.   Together, we got into the weeds of the dynamics of housing markets, discussed why traditional policy tools won't help current unaffordability problems and why some alternatives may be better, and why property and land taxes can help entrench unaffordability. To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smart-talk-hgsss/support

To celebrate our 100th episode, we wanted to do a special podcast on Henry George and Georgism. It was recorded in November of 2023 by Nathan Greene, a researcher at the Henry George School, and Ed Dodson, a long-time faculty member. Ed is an expert on Henry George and all things Georgism. As a long-time subscriber of George, land value taxation, and land use reform, he is an excellent person to talk to for our centennial episode.   Henry George is an important figure in both American and economic history. His life led him to understand the world in a complex way that gave him a unique perspective. With this perspective, George looked to solve ecological and social problems through land rights, welfare, and social justice. This blend of philosophy and economics was the genesis of Georgism, an ideology that his followers believed would solve some of the most pressing issues of the time. George grew up during the Gold Rush and would eventually live through the Gilded Age. This was a time of massive inequality, major reforms, and rapid economic growth. The various places he lived instilled in George the need for greater fairness within society. One of his famous adages is, “Let no man imagine that he has no influence. Whoever he may be, and wherever he may be placed, the man who thinks becomes a light and a power.” George believed that through reflection and critical thinking, everyone can strive towards a better life for themselves, and their community. And this still rings true today. Henry George passed over a hundred years ago, but many of the problems he lived through still plague us today. Income and wealth inequality have skyrocketed. According to Pew Research, a well-known pollster, between 1983 to 2016, the share of wealth belonging to upper-income households increased from 60% to 79%. Meanwhile, the amount held by middle-income households has been reduced by half, decreasing from 32% to 17%. Lower-income households only had 4% of wealth in 2016, down from 7% in 1983. Meanwhile, millions of young people are shut out of the real estate market and can't afford their first house. I can't help but wonder what Henry George would say if he could see the state of the world in 2023. A history of George's life, how he formed his ideas, and the movements he inspired may help us parse that out. Mr. Dodson attended Shippensburg University and Temple University where he received an economics degree. Ed worked for Fannie Mae, a public-private partnership to help distribute home mortgage loans. During his time at Fannie Mae, Mr. Dodson held numerous management and analyst positions within the Housing & Community Development group, helping revitalize neighborhoods and local communities. This gives him an interesting perspective on land use and reform, and how it can reduce inequality. He also has extensive experience as a history lecturer at the Osher Life Long Learning Institute and the Learning is For Everyone program at Burlington County College. Ed has written many papers on history and the political economy and is the author of a three-volume book series titled "The Discovery of First Principles." Together, we discussed Henry George in the context of economic history, his ideas, and how the Georgist community can turn back into a movement. To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smart-talk-hgsss/support

Today our discussion comes from our most recent annual conference: Why is Housing so Unaffordable? Causes and Solutions. For the next twelve weeks, our discussions will revolve around the topic of housing and house prices with three subtopics. The first will be root causes, followed by an evaluation of current policy responses, and finishes with alternatives to current policy and thinking around affordability. Nowadays housing issues are on everyone's mind, from ownership to affordability. But because we're so caught up in the stresses from facing the issues of real-world housing problems, we don't understand how we got here, and why that matters for finding a solution. The 20th century saw a shift towards suburbanization: the movement from city living to the suburbs. As a result, city planning moved towards bolstering these areas at the expense of cities. This caused inequality to grow between homeowners and those who can't afford the purchase of living, creating the unaffordability crisis we experience today. Mr. Mollineaux is a lifelong Georgist and hosts a popular podcast, Georgist Perspectives, on Stanford's radio where he hosts discussions on Georgist perspectives. Our guest today helps us understand the historical trajectories urban planning has led us to and looks to offer redistributive solutions that benefit city dwellers and promote equity. To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smart-talk-hgsss/support

Dr. Tideman is a Georgist economist, whose family have been Georgists for generations. He received his bachelor's degree in mathematics and economics from Reed College and his Ph.D. in economics from the University of Chicago. He has spent his career immersed in economics, teaching at numerous universities such as Harvard, the University of Buckingham, and Virginia Tech, where he currently teaches. Dr. Tideman reached the pinnacle of his career in the 1970's working for the president's council of economic advisers. He has held advisory positions within the Office of Management and Budget and Treasury Department. He is the author of many journal publications and is the author of two books: Collective Decisions and Voting and Land and Taxation; both examine collectivist economic models and decision-making. This week we discussed left-libertarianism, how land values and taxes can be systematized, and why a carbon tax is insufficient for promoting equality but good for the environment. To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/

Today's poem is by Emma Lazarus (July 22, 1849 – November 19, 1887), an American author of poetry, prose, and translations, as well as an activist for Jewish and Georgist causes. She is remembered for writing the sonnet"The New Colossus", which was inspired by the Statue of Liberty, in 1883.[1] Its lines appear inscribed on a bronze plaque, installed in 1903,[2] on the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty.[3] Lazarus was involved in aiding refugees to New York who had fled antisemitic pogroms in eastern Europe, and she saw a way to express her empathy for these refugees in terms of the statue.[4] The last lines of the sonnet were set to music by Irving Berlin as the song "Give Me Your Tired, Your Poor" for the 1949 musical Miss Liberty, which was based on the sculpting of the Statue of Liberty (Liberty Enlightening the World). The latter part of the sonnet was also set by Lee Hoiby in his song "The Lady of the Harbor" written in 1985 as part of his song cycle "Three Women".Lazarus was also the author of Poems and Translations (New York, 1867); Admetus, and other Poems(1871); Alide: An Episode of Goethe's Life (Philadelphia, 1874); Poems and Ballads of Heine (New York, 1881); Poems, 2 Vols.; Narrative, Lyric and Dramatic; as well as Jewish Poems and Translations.[5]—Bio via Wikipedia This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit dailypoempod.substack.com/subscribe

Join us for Non Serviam Podcast 47. This month host Lucy Steigerwald jumped the pond to talk geo-anarchism, land, taxes, and a whole lot more with Jock Coats. Jock is an Economist, Georgist, and Anarchist. Connect with Jock at https://twitter.com/jockox3 Lucy is an accomplished writer and a self-described market-anarchist, feminist, and history nerd. Lucy is a long-time friend of the collective, a Contributing Editor at AntiWar.com, and you may also know Lucy from her writings at FEE, Vice, Reason, or her blogs; https://thestagblog.com/, https://lucysteigerwald.substack.com/, https://original.antiwar.com/author/lucy/, and https://www.vice.com/en/contributor/lucy-steigerwald You can find Lucy online https://twitter.com/LucyStag 0:01:26 Political Journey 0:04:02 Housing in Oxford 0:06:05 Land as the New Gold 0:08:03 LVT 0:11:53 Wanting to be an Anarchist 0:22:38 Georgist Anarchists 0:27:12 Mutualism 0:31:31 Geo-Mutualism 0:33:20 Anarchism and Georgism 0:36:07 Land 0:50:00 Rothbard on Georgism 0:51:27 Understanding Georgism and LVT 0:55:36 Community Control 1:00:24 LVT as a silver bullet 1:05:49 LVT Advocates 1:07:34 Free Trade 1:14:22 Land as Property 1:20:17 UBI and Pragmatism 1:25:56 Regulation as Rent 1:27:03 Cappuccino Question 1:29:46 Ending

Our episode today comes from our most recent panel discussion titled Monopoly! The Real Story Behind America's Most Popular Game. This talk explores the true origins of the board game and how its original creator intended it as a way to learn about Georgism. Most do not know this, including myself before listening to the talk, but the inventor, Lizzie Magie, was a sharp political commentator of her time. Using all sorts of creative methods, including the board game itself, Lizzie was a shrewd political critic of her era. As a progressive during the gilded age, Ms. Magie used her voice to shed light on the struggles of civil rights movements. If you love programs on how companies are started or how things are made, you'll definitely want to check out this episode. Our talk is hosted by our Director of Education, Ibrahima Drame, who is joined by author and journalist, Mary Pilon. To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/

Andrew talks with Gare and Mia about the history of Garden Cities and how a Georgist urban planning idea inspired Walt Disney (pejorative).See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Continuing on the theme of solutions to the housing crisis I interviewed economist Shreya Nanda about the Georgists and the YIMBYs.Georgists follow the ideas of the 19th century thinker and reformer Henry George and support a land value tax. YIMBYs (which stands for Yes In My Backyard) think the way to get out of the housing crisis is to build, build, build! Shreya classes herself as both a Georgist & a YIMBY, which made this a very fruitful conversation. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Mr. Davies was the program director of the Henry George Institute and editor of the Georgist Journal. He is the author of "The Sassafras Crossing" and "The Alodia Scrapbook," both of which are fiction novels that explore the topic of development on a local, more personal level. In addition to his novels, he was the editor of the Mason Gaffney Reader and the creator of Henry George's abridged version of The Science of the Political Economy, one of George's seminal works. A lover of all things Henry George, Lindy spent his life promoting Georgist values and spreading his word. Mr. Davies, unfortunately, passed away in 2019. May he rest in peace. Together we discussed the progress Georgists have made in promoting Georgist values, how monopolies act as extractive institutions in the economy, and why a systemic view is better for solving economic quandaries than a micro-based approach. To check out more of our content, including our research, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/

One of my best episodes ever. Lars Doucet is the author of Land is a Big Deal, a book about Georgism which has been praised by Vitalik Buterin, Scott Alexander, and Noah Smith. Sam Altman is the lead investor in his new startup, ValueBase.Talking with Lars completely changed how I think about who creates value in the world and who leeches off it.We go deep into the weeds on Georgism:* Why do even the wealthiest places in the world have poverty and homelessness, and why do rents increase as fast as wages?* Why are land-owners able to extract the profits that rightly belong to labor and capital?* How would taxing the value of land alleviate speculation, NIMBYism, and income and sales taxes?Watch on YouTube. Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or any other podcast platform. Read the full transcript here.Follow Lars on Twitter. Follow me on Twitter.Timestamps(00:00:00) - Intro(00:01:11) - Georgism(00:03:16) - Metaverse Housing Crises(00:07:10) - Tax Leisure?(00:13:53) - Speculation & Frontiers(00:24:33) - Social Value of Search (00:33:13) - Will Georgism Destroy The Economy?(00:38:51) - The Economics of San Francisco(00:43:31) - Transfer from Landowners to Google?(00:46:47) - Asian Tigers and Land Reform(00:51:19) - Libertarian Georgism(00:55:42) - Crypto(00:57:16) - Transitioning to Georgism(01:02:56) - Lars's Startup & Land Assessment (01:15:12) - Big Tech(01:20:50) - Space(01:23:05) - Copyright(01:25:02) - Politics of Georgism(01:33:10) - Someone Is Always Collecting RentsTranscriptThis transcript was partially autogenerated and thus may contain errors.Lars Doucet - 00:00:00: Over the last century, we've had this huge conflict. All the oxygen's been sucked up by capitalism and socialism duking it out. We have this assumption that you either have to be pro worker or pro business that you can't be both. I have noticed a lot of crypto people get into Georgism, so not the least of which is Vitalik Buterin and you endorse my book. If you earn $100,000 in San Francisco as a family of four, you are below the poverty line. Let's start with just taxing the things nobody has made and that people are gatekeeping access to. Let's tax essentially monopolies and rent seeking. The income tax needs to do this full anal probe on everyone in the country and then audits the poor at a higher rate than the rich. And it's just this horrible burden we have. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:00:39: Okay, today I have the pleasure of speaking with Lars Doucet, who developed the highly acclaimed Defender's Quest game and part two is coming out next year, but now he's working on a new startup. But the reason we're talking is that he wrote a review of Henry George's progress and poverty that won Scott Alexander's Book Review Contest and now it has been turned into an expanded into this book Land is a Big Deal. So Lars, welcome to the podcast. New Speaker: Great to be here, Dwarkesh . Okay, so let's just get into it. What is Georgism? Lars Doucet - 00:01:12: Okay, so the book is based off of the philosophy of a 19th century American economist by the name of Henry George from once we get George's and basically George's thesis is kind of the title of my book that land is a big deal. Georgism is often reduced to its main policy prescription that we should have a land value tax, which is a tax on the unimproved value of land, but not a tax on any buildings or infrastructure on top of the land, anything humans add. But the basic insight of it is that it's kind of reflected in the aphorisms you hear from real estate agents when they say things like the three laws of real estate or location location location and buy land, it's the one thing they're not making any more of. It's basically this insight that land has this hidden role in the economy that is really underrated. But if you look at history through the right lens, control over land is the oldest struggle of human history. It goes beyond human history. Animals have been fighting over land forever. That's what they're fighting over in Ukraine and Russia right now, right? And basically the fundamental insight of Georgism is that over the last century, we've had this huge conflict. All the oxygen's been sucked up by capitalism and socialism duking it out. We have this assumption that you either have to be pro worker or pro business that you can't be both. And Georgism is genuinely pro pro worker and pro business. But what it's against is is land speculation. And if we can find a way to share the earth, then we can solve the paradox that is the title of George's book, progress and poverty, why does poverty advance even when progress advances? Why do we have all this industrialized technology and new methods and it in George's time it was industrial technology in our time its computers and everything else? We have all this good stuff. We can make more than we've ever made before. There's enough wealth for everybody. And yet we still have inequality. Where does it come from? And George answers that question in his book. And I expand on it in mine. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:03:15: Yep. OK, so yeah, I'm excited to get into the theory of all of it in a second. But first I'm curious how much of your interest in the subject has been inspired with the fact that as a game developer, you're constantly dealing with decentralized rent seekers, like Steve or iOS app store. Is that part of the inspiration behind your interest in Georgism or is that separate? Lars Doucet - 00:03:38: It's interesting. I wouldn't say that's what clued me into it in the first place. But I have become very interested in all forms of rent seeking. In this general category of things we call land-like assets that come to first mover advantages in these large platform economies. I've started to think a lot about it basically. But the essence of land speculation is you have this entire class of people who are able to basically gatekeep access to a scarce resource that everybody needs, which is land, that you can't opt out of needing. And because of that, everyone basically has to pay them rent. And those people don't necessarily do anything. They just got there first and tell everyone else, it's like, well, if you want to participate in the world, you need to pay me. And so we're actually the actual connection with game development, actually clued me into Georgism. And I'd heard about Georgism before. I'd read about it. I thought it was interesting. But then I started noticing this weird phenomenon in online multiplayer games going back 30 years repeatedly of virtual housing crises, which is the most bizarre concept in the world to me, like basically a housingcrisis in the Metaverse and predecessors to the Metaverse. And as early as the Alt Online (?)online when I was 19, this is this online game that you could play. And you could build houses in the game and put them down somewhere. And so what I found was that houses were actually fairly cheap. You could work long enough in a game to be afford to buy blueprints for a house, which will be put it somewhere. But there was no land to put it on. And at the time, I thought, oh, well, I guess the server failed up. I didn't really think much about it. I was like, this stinks. I didn't join the game early enough. I'm screwed out of housing. And then I kind of forgot about it. And then 20 years later, I checked back in. And that housing crisis is still ongoing in that game. That game is still running a good 25 years later. And that housing crisis remains unsolved. And you have this entire black market for housing. And then I noticed that that trend was repeated in other online games, like Final Fantasy 14. And then recently in 2022, with all this huge wave of crypto games, like Axi Infinity, and that's Decentral Land and the Sandbox. And then Yuga Labs' Board-Ape Yacht Club, the other side, had all these big land sales. And at the time, I was working as an analyst for a video game consulting firm called Novik. And I told my employers, it's like, we are going to see all the same problems happen. We are going to see virtual land speculation. They're going to hit virtual. They're going to reproduce the conditions of housing crisis in the real world. And it's going to be a disaster. And I called it, and it turns out I was right. And we've now seen that whole cycle kind of work itself out. And it just kind of blew my mind that we could reproduce the problems of the real world so articulately in the virtual world without anyone trying to do it. It just happened. And that is kind of the actual connection between my background in game design and kind of getting George Pilled as the internet kids call it these days. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:06:43: There was a hilarious clip. Some comedian was on Joe Rogan's podcast. I think it was like Tim Dillon. And they're talking about, I think, Decentraland, where if you want to be Snoop Dogg's neighbor in the Metaverse, it costs like a couple million dollars or something. And Joe Rogan was like, so you think you can afford to live there. And then Tim Dillon's like, no, but I'm going to start another Metaverse and I'm going to work hard. But OK, so let's go into Georgism himself. So Tyler Cohen had a blog post a long time ago who was comparing taxing land to taxing unimproved labor or unimproved capital. And it's an interesting concept, right? Should I, so I have a CS degree, right? Should I be taxed at the same level as an entry level software engineer instead of a podcast or because I'm not using my time as efficiently as possible. And so leisure in another way is the labor equivalent of having an unimproved parking lot in the middle of San Francisco or capital. If I'm just keeping my capital out of the economy and therefore making it not useful, maybe I should have that capital taxed at the rate of the capital gains on T-Bill. And this way, you're not punishing people for having profitable investments, which you're kind of doing with a capital gains, right? What would you think of that comparison? Lars Doucet - 00:08:07: Yeah, so really, before you can even answer that question, you've got to go back to ground moral principles you're operating on. Like, is your moral operating principle like we just want to increase efficiency? So we're going to tax everyone in a way to basically account for the wasted opportunity cost, which brings up a lot of other questions of like, well, who decides what that is. But I think the Georgist argument is a little different. We're not necessarily like it is efficient, the tax we propose, but it actually stems kind of from a more, from a different place, a more kind of fundamental aspect of justice, you know? And from our perspective, if you work and you produce value, your work produced that value, right? And if you save money and accumulate capital in order to put that capital to work to receive a return, you've also provided something valuable to society, you know? You saved money so a factory could exist, right? You saved money so that a shipping company could get off off the ground. You know, those are valuable, contributed things, but nobody made the earth. The earth pre-exists all of us. And so someone who provides land actually does the opposite of providing land. They unprovide land, and then they charge you for opening the gate. And so the argument for charging people on the unimproved value of land is that we want to tax unproductive rent seeking. We want to tax non-produced assets because we think we want to encourage people to produce assets. We want to encourage people to produce labor, to produce capital. We want more of those things. And there's that aphorism that if you want less of something, you should tax it. So I mean, maybe there is a case for some kind of galaxy brain take of, you know, taxing unrealized opportunity costs or whatever, but I'm less interested in that. And my moral principles are more about, let's start with just taxing the things nobody has made and that people are gatekeeping access to. Let's tax essentially monopolies and rent seeking. And then if we still need to raise more taxes, we can talk about that later. But let's start with, let's start with just taxing the worst things in society and then stop taxing things we actually want more of because we have this mentality right now where everything's a trade off and we have to accept the downsides of income taxes, of sales taxes, of capital taxes because we just need the revenue and it has to come from somewhere. And my argument is it's like, it can come from a much better somewhere. So let's start with that.Dwarkesh Patel - 00:10:39: Yeah, yeah. So I guess if it was the case that we've implemented a land value tax and we're still having a revenue shortfall and we need another kind of tax and we're going to have to keep income taxes or capital gains taxes. Would you in that situation prefer a sort of tax where you're basically taxed on the opportunity costs of your time rather than the actual income you generated or the returns you would interest your generate in your capital? Lars Doucet - 00:11:04: No, I think probably not. I think you would probably want to go with some other just like simpler tax for the sake of it there's too many degrees of freedom in there. And it's like, we can talk about why I will defend the Georgist case for property tax assessments, you know, for land value tax. But I think it gets different when you start like judging what is the most valuable use of your time because that's a much more subjective question. Like you're like, okay, are you providing more value to society as being a podcaster or being a CS computer science person or creating a startup? It's like that may not be evident for some time. You know what I mean? Like I can't think of an example, but like think of people who were never successful during their lifetimes. I think the guy who invented what was it? FM radio, right? He threw himself out a window because he never got it really adopted during his lifetime but it went on to change everything, you know? So if we were taxing him during his lifetime based off of what he was doing of being a failure, like if Van Gogh was taxed of his like wasting his life as an artist as he thought he was, which ultimately led to his suicide, you know, a lot of these things are not necessarily realized at the time. And so I think that's, and you know, it would need a much bigger kind of bureaucracy to like figure that all out. So I think you should go with a more modest. I mean, I think after land value tax, you should do things like severance tax on natural resources and other taxes on other monopolies and rents. And so I think the next move after land value tax is not immediately to capital and income taxes and sales taxes, but to other taxes on other rents seeking and other land like assets that aren't literally physically land. And then only after you've done all of those, if you still, you know, absolutely then, then move on to, you know, the bad taxes. What is this, severance tax? Severance tax is a tax on the extraction of natural resources. Is what Norway does with their oil industry that has been massively successful and a key reason that Norway has avoided the resource curse? Yeah. Basically, it's, Georgist purist will say it's essentially a land value tax but of a different kind. A land value tax like you can't normally like extracts just like land like on this, in this house you're living on, you're like, you're not using up this land, but non-renewable resources you can use up. Yeah. You know, and so a severance tax is basically, Nestle should be charged a severance tax for the water they're using, for instance, you know, because all they're doing is enclosing a pre-existing natural resource that used to belong to the people that they've essentially enclosed and now they're just putting it in bottles and selling it to people. You know, they should be able to realize the value of the value add they give to that water, but not to just taking that resource away. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:13:53: No that makes sense. Okay, so let's go deep into the actual theory and logic of Georgism. Okay. One thing I was confused by is why property owners who have land in places that are really desirable are not already incentivized to make the most productive use of that land. So even without a property, sorry, a land tax, if you have some property in San Francisco incentives, let's go, why are you not incentivized to construct it to the fullest extent possible by the law, to, you know, collect rents anyways, you know what I mean? Like why are you keeping it that as a parking lot? Lars Doucet - 00:14:28: Right, right, right. So there's a lot of reasons. And one of them has to do with, there's an image in the book that this guy put together for me. I'll show it to you later. But what it does is that it shows the rate of return. What a land speculator is actually optimizing for is their rate of return, right? And so if land appreciates by 10% a year, you know, you're actually incentivized to invest in vacant land or a tear down property because the building of a tear down property is like worth negative value. So the land's cheaper because there's garbage on it, you know? Then you are to necessarily invest in a property and you're basically your marginal dollar is better spent on more land than it is on building up. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:15:16: But eventually shouldn't this be priced into the price of land so that the returns are no longer 10% or they're just like basically what you could get for any other asset. And at that point, then the rate of return is similar for building thingson top of your existing land than buying a new land because like the new land is like the, you know, that return has been priced into other land. Lars Doucet - 00:15:38: Well, I mean, arguably, empirically, we just don't see that, you know, and we see rising land prices as long as productivity and population increases. Those productivity and population gains get soaked into the price of the land. It's because of this phenomenon called Ricardo's Law of Rent and it's been pretty empirically demonstrated that basically, and it has to do with the negotiation power. But like why some people do of course, build and invest, you know, there's a lot of local laws that restrict people's ability to build. But another reason is just like, it also has to do with the existing part of it. It part of the effect is partially the existing property tax regime actively incentivizes empty lots because you have a higher tax burden if you build, right? So what actually happens is a phenomenon that's similar to oil wells, right? You have, it's not just because of property taxes, those do encourage you to keep it empty. But there's this phenomenon called land banking and waiting for the land to ripen, right? Sure, I could build it now, but I might have a lot of land parcels I've got. And I don't need to build it now because I think the prices might go up later and it would be better to build on it later than it is now. And it's not costing me anything to keep it vacant now. If I build now, I'm gonna have to pay a little bit more property taxes. And I know in three years that the price is gonna be even better. So maybe I'll wait to incur those construction costs then and right now I'm gonna focus more on building over here. And like I've got a lot of things to do, so I'm just gonna squat on it here. It's the same way I have, I'm squatting like, you know, I bought to my shame, like about 30 domain names, you know, most of them bought before I kind of got ontoGeorgism. And it's like, yeah, I'll pay 15 bucks a year to just hold it, why not? You know what I mean? I might use that someday. Right. And it's like, I should probably release all the ones I have no intent of using because I was looking for a domain for my startup the other day and every single two word.com is taken. Right, right. And it has been for like 10 years, you know, and it's a similar phenomenon. It's just like some of it is economic, rational following of incentives. And some of it is just it's like, well, this is a good asset. I'm just gonna hold on to it because why not? And no one is, and I don't have any pressure to build right now. And this happens on the upswing and on the downswing of cities. So while the population's growing and while the population's declining, people will just buy a lot of land and hold it out of use. Cause it's also just a great place to park money because it's an asset that you know if the population ever starts growing, it's gonna keep its value better than almost any other hard asset you have. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:18:16: Yep yep. I guess another like broader criticism of this way of thinking is, listen, this is all, and sorry for using these like podcast lingo of scarcity mindset, but this is all like scarcity mindset of, you know, land is limited. Well, why don't we just focus on the possibility of expanding the amount of usable land? I mean, there's like not really a shortage of land in you. Maybe there's a shortage of land in urban areas. But you know, why don't we like expand into the seas? And why don't we expand into the air and space? Why are we thinking in this sort of scarce mindset? Lars Doucet - 00:18:48: Right. Okay, so I love this question because actually our current status quo mindset is the scarcity mindset. And Georgism is the abundance mindset, right? And we can have that abundance if we learn to share the land. Because right now, you know, why don't we expand? And the answer is we've tried that. We've done it twice. And it's the story of America's frontier, right? And so like right now there's plenty of empty land in Nevada, but nobody wants it. And you have to ask why, right? You also have to ask the question of how did we have virtual housing crises in the Metaverse where they could infinitely expand all they want? Like how is that even possible, you know? And the answer has to do with what we call the urban agglomeration effect. What's really valuable is human relationships, proximity to other human beings, those dense networks of human beings. And so the idea is not necessarily that like, in a certain sense, the issue is that land is not an indistinguishable, fungible commodity. Location really matters. Or America has a finite amount of land, but it might as well be an infinite plane. We're not going to fill up every square inch of America for probably thousands of years if we ever do, right? But what is scarce is specific locations. They're non-fungible, you know? And to a certain extent, it's like, okay, if you don't want to live in New York, you can live in San Francisco or any other like big city. But what makes New York New York is non-fungible What makes San Francisco San Francisco is non-fungible That particular cluster of VCs in San Francisco until or unless that city completely explodes and that moves somewhere else to Austin or whatever, you know, at which point, Austin will be non-fungible. I mean, Austin is non-fungible right now. And so the point is that the way Georgism unlocks the abundance of it, let me talk about the frontier. We have done frontier expansion. That is why immigrants came over from Europe, you know, and then eventually the rest of the world, to America to, you know, settle the frontier. And the losers of that equation were, of course, the Indians who were already here and got kicked out. But that was theoriginal idea of America. And I like to say that America's tragedy, America's problem is that America is a country that has the mindset of being a frontier state, but is in fact a state which has lost its frontier. And that is why you have these conversations with people like boomers who are like, why can't the next generation just pull itself up by its bootstraps? Because America has had at least, I would say two major periods of frontier expansion. The first was the actual frontier, the West, the Oregon Trail, the covered wagons, you know, the displacement of the Indians. And so that was a massive time, that was the time in which Henry George was writing, was right when that frontier was closing, right? When all that land, that free land was being taken, and the advantages of that land was now being fully priced in. That is what it means for a frontier to close, is that now the good productive land, the value of it is fully priced in. But when the frontier is open, you can just go out there and take it, and you can get productive land and realize the gains of that. And the second frontier expansion was after Henry George's death, was the invention of the automobile, the ability to have a job in the city, but not have to live in the city. The fact that you could quickly travel in, like I commuted in to visit you here, right? That is because of the automobile frontier opening that has allowed me to live in some other city, but be able to do productive work like this podcast by driving in. But the problem is, sprawl can only take you so far, before that frontier as well closes, and by closes I don't mean suburban expansion stops. What I mean is that now, suburban homes, you fully price in the value of the benefits are able to accrue by having that proximity to a city, but still being able to live over here, through of course, for Ricardo's Law for it. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:22:37: Yeah, but I feel like this is still compatible with the story of, we should just focus on increased in technology and abundance, rather than trying to estimate how much rent is available now, given current status quo technologies. I mean, the car is a great example of this, but imagine if there were like flying cars, right? Like there's a, where's my flying car? There's like a whole analysis in that book about, you know, if you could, if people are still commuting like 20 minutes a day, you know, a lot more land is actually in the same travel distance as was before, and now all this land would be worth as much, even in terms of relationships that you could accommodate, right? So why not just build like flying cars instead of focusing on land rent? Lars Doucet - 00:23:21: Well, because these things have a cost, right? The cost of frontier expansion was murdering all the Indians and the cost of automobile expansion was climate change. You know, there has to be a price for that. And then eventually, the problem is you eventually, when you get to the end of that frontier expansion, you wind up with the same problem we had in the first place. Eventually, the problem is the first generation will make out like gangbusters if we ever invent flying cars, even better like Star Trek matter teleporters. You know, that'll really do it. Then you can really live in Nevada and have a job in New York. Yeah. There are some people who claim that Zoom is this, but it's not, you know, we've seen the empirical effects of that and it's like, it's the weakest like semi-frontier we've had and it's already closed. Because, because of Zoom, houses like this over in Austin have gone up in value because there is demand for them and there's demand for people to telecommute. And so anyone who, so the increased demand for living out in the suburbs is now basically priced in because of the Zoom economy. And so the thing is the first people who did that, who got there really quick, the first people to log in to the ultimate online server were able to claim that pace of the frontier and capture that value. But the next generation has to pay more in rent and more in home prices to get that. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:24:34: Actually, that raises another interesting criticism ofGeorgism, this is actually a paper from Zachary Gouchanar and Brian Kaplan, where it was titled the Cerseioretic critique of Georgism, and the point they made was one of these, like one way of thinking about the improvement to land is actually identifying that this land is valuable. Maybe because you realize it has like an oil well in it and maybe you realize that it's like the perfect proximity to these like Chinese restaurants and this mall and whatever. And then just finding which land is valuable is actually something that takes capital and also takes, you know, like you deciding to upend your life and go somewhere, you know, like all kinds of effort. And that is not factored into the way you would conventionally think of the improvements to land that would not be taxed, right? So in some sense, you getting that land is like a subsidy for you identifying that the land is valuable and can be used to productive ends. Lars Doucet - 00:25:30:Right, yeah, I know. So I've read that paper. So first of all, the first author of that Zachary Gouchanar yeah, I'm not been able to pin him down on what exactly meant on this, but he's made some public statements where he's revised his opinion since writing that paper and that he's much more friendly to the arguments ofGeorgism now than when he first wrote that paper. So I'd like to pin him down and see exactly what he meant by that because it was just a passing comment. But as regards Kaplan's critique, Kaplan's critique only applies to a 100% LVT where you fully capture all of the land value tax. And the most extreme Georgists I know are only advocating for like an 85% land value tax. That would still leave. And Kaplan doesn't account at all for the negative effects of speculation. He's making a speculation is good actually argument. And even if we grant his argument, he still needs to grapple with all the absolutely empirically observed problems of land speculation. And if we want to make some kind of compromise between maybe speculation could have this good discovery effect, there's two really good answers to that. First, just don't do 100% LVT, which we probably can't practically do anyway because of natural limitations just empirically, you know, in the signal. It's like you don't want to do 115% land value tax. That drives people off the land. So we want to make sure that we like have a high land value tax but make sure not to go over. And so that would leave a sliver of land rent that would still presumably incentivize this sort of thing. There's no argument for why 100% of the land rent is necessary to incentivize the good things that Kaplan was talking about. The second argument is when he talks about oil, well, we have the empirical evidence from the Norwegian massively successful petroleum model that shows in the case of natural resources how you should deal with this. And what Norway does is that they have a massive, massively huge severance tax on oil extraction. And according to Kaplan's argument, this should massively destroy the incentive for companies to go out there and discover the oil. And empirically, it doesn't. Now what Norway does is that they figured out, okay, so the oil companies, their argument is that we need the oil rents, right? We need these oil rents where we will not be incentivized for the massive capital cost of offshore oil drilling. Well, Norway's like, well, if you just need to cover the cost of offshore oil drilling, we'll subsidize that. We'll just pay you. We'll just pay you to go discover the oil. But when you find the oil, that oil belongs to the Norwegian people. Now you may keep some of the rents but most of it goes to the Norwegian people. But hey, all your R&D is free. All your discovery is free. If the problem is discovery, we just subsidize discovery. And then the oil companies are like, okay, that sounds like a great deal. We don't have to, because without that, what the oil companies do is that they're like, okay, we're taking all these risks. So I'm gonna sit on all these oil wells like people sitting on domain names because I might use them later and the price might go up later. But now because there's a huge severance tax, you're forced to drill now and you're actually, you're actual costs of discovery and R&D and all those capital costs are just taken care of. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:28:26: But isn't there a flip side to that where I mean, one of the economic benefits of speculation, obviously there's drawbacks. But one of the benefits is that it gets rid of the volatility and prices where our speculator will buy when it's cheap and sell when the price is high. And in doing so, they're kind of making the asset less volatile over time. And if you're basically going to tell people who have oil on their land, like we're gonna keep taxing you. If you don't take it out, you're gonna keep getting taxed. You're encouraging this massive glut of a finite resource to be produced immediately, which is bad. If you think we might need that reserve in the ground 20 years from now or 30 years from now, you know, went oil reserves were running low. Lars Doucet - 00:29:10: Not necessarily, you know? And so the problem is that speculation in the sense you're talking about if like encouraging people to do arbitrage is good for capital because we can make more capital. But we can't make more land and we can't make more non-renewable natural resources. And the issue in peer, and I just think the evidence just doesn't support that empirically because if anything, land speculation has causes land values to just constantly increase, not to find some natural part, especially with how easy it is to finance two thirds of bank loans just chase real estate up. And that's just like, if you just look at the history of the prices of, you know, of residential real estate in America, it's like, it's not this cyclical graph where it like keeps going back down. It keeps going back down, but it keeps going up and up and up, just on a straight line along with productivity. And it underlines and undergirds, major issues, everything that's driving our housing crisis, which then undergirds so much of inequality and pollution and climate change issues. And so with regards to speculations, like even if I just bite that bull and it's like, okay, speculation is good actually, I don't think anyone's made the case that speculators need to capture a hundred percent of the rents to be properly incentivized to do anything good that comes out of speculation. I think at some small reasonable percentage, you know, five to 10 percent of the rents, maybe 15 if I'm feeling generous, but I don't think anyone's empirically made the case that it should be a hundred percent, which is more or less a status quo. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:30:31:I mean, with regards to that pattern of the fact that the values tend to keep going up implies that there's nothing cyclical that the speculators are dampening. Lars Doucet - 00:30:41: Well, there are cycles to be sure, but it's not like, it's something that resets to zero. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:30:45: Yeah, but that's also true of like the stock market, right? Over time that goes up, but speculators are still have like an economic role to play in a stock market of making sure prices are, Lars Doucet - 00:30:55: I mean, the difference is that people are now paying an ever increasing portion of their incomes to the land sector. And that didn't used to be the case. And if it keeps going, it's going to be, I mean, you have people are now paying 50% of their income just for rent. And that's not sustainable in the long term. You're going to have the cycle you have there is revolution. You know, you, you know, Dwarkesh Patel - 00:31:16: (laughing) Lars Doucet - 00:31:17: I'm serious. like what happens is like you look through history, you either have land reform or you have revolution. And you know, it's, it's either like either you have a never ending cycle of, of, of transfers of income from the unlanded to the landed. And eventually the, the unlanded will not put up with that. You know, there was a real chance in the 19th century, at the end of the 19th century of America going full on socialist or communist and the only thing that saved us. What, and George's argument was like, it's either Georgism or communism. And if you want to save capitalism and not go toTotalitarian, we need Georgismand then what George failed to anticipate was, you, of course, the automobile. And the automobile kicked the can down another generation, another couple generations, right? And it came at the cost of sprawl. And that made everyone feel like we had solved the issue. But basically we just, and the cost of sprawl are enormous in terms of pollution and poor land use. Just look at Houston right now, right? But now we've come at the end of that frontier and now we're at the same question. And it's like, you see this research in interest in leftism in America and that's not a coincidence, right? Because the rent is too damn high and poor people and poor people and young people feel really, really shoved out of the promise and social contract that was given to their parents and they're jealous of it and they're wondering where it went. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:32:36: Yeah, yeah. Actually, you just mentioned that a lot of bank loans are given basically so you can like get a mortgage and get a house that's like towards land. There was an interesting question on Twitter that I thought was actually pretty interesting about this. I can't find the name of the person who asked it. So sorry, I can't give you credit, but they basically asked if that's the case and if most bank loans are going towards helping you buy land that's like artificially more expensive, but now you implement a land value tax and all these property values crash. Oh yeah. Well, when we see just, and then all these mortgages are obviously they can't pay them back. Lars Doucet - 00:33:13: Right, right, right. Are we gonna destroy the banking sector? Dwarkesh Patel - 00:33:15: Exactly. We'll have like a great, great depression.Lars Doucet - 00:33:17: Well, I mean, if you, okay, so like this is, this is kind of like, I mean, I'm not, I'm not trying to compare landlords to slave owners or something, but it's like, it's like the South had an entire economy based off of slavery. This thing that like we now agree was bad, right? And it's like we shouldn't have kept slavery because the, the South, the, like it really disrupted the Southern Economy when we got rid of slavery, but it was still the right thing to do. And so I mean, there is no magic button I could push as much as I might like to do so that will give us 100% land value tax everywhere in America tomorrow. So I think the actual path towards a Georgist Future is gonna have to be incremental. There'll be enough time to unwind all those investments and get to a more sane banking sector. So I mean, like if we were to go overnight, yeah, I think there would be some shocks in the banking sector and I can't predict what those would be, but I also don't think that's a risk that's actually gonna happen. Because like we just, we just cannot make a radical change like that on all levels overnight. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:34:13: Yeah yeah, yeah. Okay, so let's get back to some of these theoretical questions. One I had was, I guess I don't fully understand the theoretical reason for thinking that you can collect arbitrarily large rents. Why doesn't the same economic principle of competition, I get that there's not infinite landowners, but there are multiple landowners in any region, right? So if for the same reason that profit is competed away in any other enterprise, you know, if one landowner is extracting like $50 a profit a month, and another landowner is extracting, you know, like whatever, right? Like a similar amount of $50. One of them, and they're both competing for the same tenant. One of them will decrease their rent so that the tenant will come to them and the other one will do the same and the bidding process continues until all the profits are, you know,bidded away. Lars Doucet - 00:35:04: Right, so this is Ricardo's law front, right? And there's a section on in the book with a bunch of illustrations you can show. And so the issue is that we can't make more land, right? And so you might be like, well, there's plenty of land in Nevada, but the point is there's only so much land in Manhattan. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:35:19: But the people who have land inManhattan, why aren't they competing against themselves or each other? Lars Doucet - 00:35:23: Right, well, what they do is because the nature of the scarcity of there's only so many locations in Manhattan and there's so many people who want to live there, right? And so all the people who want to live there have to outbid each other. And so basically, so like, let me give a simple agricultural example model. And then I will explain how the agricultural model translates to a residential model. Basically, when you are paying to live in an urban area, or even a suburban area like here in Austin, what you're actually paying for is the right to have proximity to realize the productive capacity of that location. IE, I want to live in Austin because I can have access to a good job, you know what I mean? Or whatever is cool about Austin, a good school, those amenities. And the problem is you have to pay for those and you have to outbid other people who are willing to pay for those. And Ricardo's Rolf Rent says that the value of the amenities and the productivity of an area, as it goes up, that gets soaked into the land prices. And the mechanism by that is that it's like, okay, say I want to buy a watermelon, right? And there's only one watermelon left out bid that guy. But the watermelon growers can be like, oh, a lot of people want watermelon. So next season, there's going to be more watermelons because he's going to produce more watermelons. But because there's only so many locations in Austin, you know, within the natural limits of our transportation network, basically it forces the competition on the side of the people who are, essentially the tenants, right? It forces us into one side of competition with each other. And that, and so there's an example of like, a simple agricultural example is like, okay, say there is a common field that anyone can work on and you can make 100 units of wealth if you work on it, right? So, and there's another field that you can also learn 100 units of wealth in, but it's owned by a landowner. Why would you, why would you go and work on the landowners when you're going to have to pay them rent? You wouldn't pay them any rent at all. You would work on the field that's free, but if the landowner buys that field and now your best opportunity is a field that's only worth a free field that will produce 10 units of wealth, now he can charge you 90 units of wealth becauseyou have no opportunity to go anywhere else. And so basically as more land gets bought and subject to private ownership in an area, landowners over time get to increase the rent, not to a maximum level, there are limits to it. And the limits is what's called the margin of production, which is basically you can charge up to, and this is where the competition comes in, the best basic like free alternative, you know, and that's usually, you can realize that geographically, like out on the margins of Austin, there's marginal land that basically is available for quite cheap, you know, and it might be quite far away, and it used to be not so quite far away 20, 30 years ago, you know, and so as that margin slowly gets privatized, landowners can charge up to that margin. The other limit is subsistence, that can't charge more than you're actually able to pay, but the basic example is that, so this is why this is how frontier expansion works. When the entire continent's free, the first settler comes in, strikes a pick in the ground, keeps all of their wealth, but as more and more of it gets consolidated, then landowners are able to charge proportionately more until they're charging essentially up to subsistence. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:38:51: Yeah, does that explain property values in San Francisco? I mean, they are obviously very high, but I don't feel like they're that high where this offer engineers were working at Google or living as subsistence levels, neither are they at the margin of reduction where it's like, this is what it would cost to live out in the middle of California, and then commute like three hours to work or something. Lars Doucet - 00:39:13: Right, well, so it has to do with two things. So first of all, it's over the long run, and so it's like, you've had a lot of productivity booms in San Francisco, right? And so it takes some time for that to be priced in, you know, and it can be over a while, but given a long enough time period it'll eventually get there. And then when we're talking about stuff, it's also based off of the average productivity. The average resident of San Francisco is maybe not as productive as a high, and like basically doesn't earn as high an income necessarily as a high income product worker. And so this means that if you are a higher than productive, higher than average productivity person, it's worth it to live in the expensive town because you're being paid more than the average productivity that's captured in rent, right? But if you're a low, if you're lower than average productivity, you flee high productive areas. You go to more marginal areas because those are the only places you can basically afford to make a living. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:40:06: Okay, that's very interesting. That's actually one of the questions I was really curious about. So I'm glad to hear an answer on that. Another one is, so the idea is, you know, land is soaking up the profits that capitalists and laborers are entitled to in the form of rent. But when I look at the wealthiest people in America, yeah, there's people who own a lot of land, but they bought that land after they became wealthy from doing things that were capital or labor, depending on how you define starting a company. Like sure, Bill Gates owns a lot of land in Montana or whatever, but like the reason he has all that wealth to begin with is because he started a company, you know, that's like basically labor or capital,however you define it? Right. So how do you explain the fact that all the wealthy people are, you know, capitalists or laborers? Lars Doucet - 00:40:47: Well, so the thing is, one of the big missed apprehensions people have is that, when they think of billionaires, they think of people like Bill Gates and Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos, those are actually the minority billionaires, most billionaires or hedge funds are people involved in hedge funds. You know, bankers and what are bankers, most what are two thirds of banks? It's real estate, you know? And so, but more to your point, like if I, if it is like point that directly into it, it's like, I don't necessarily have a problem with the billionaire existing. You know what I mean? If someone like genuinely like bring something new into the world and like, you know, I don't necessarily buy the narrative that like billionaires are solely responsible for everything that comes out of their company, you know, I think they like to present that image. But I don't necessarily have a problem with a billionaire existing. I have a problem with, you know, working class people not being able to feed their families, you know, and so like the greater issue is the fact that the rent is too high rather than that Jeff Bezos is obscenely rich. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:41:45:No, no, I guess my point was in that, like, I'm not complaining that your solution would not fix the fact that billionaires are this. I also like that there's billionaires. What I'm pointing out is it's weird that, if you're theory of, like, where all the sort of plus in our society is getting, you know, given away is that it's going to landowners. And yet the most wealthy people in our society are not landowners. Doesn't that kind of contradict your theory? Lars Doucet - 00:42:11: Well, a lot of the wealthy people in our society are landowners, right? And it's just like, it's not the, so the, so the thing is is that basically making wealth off land is a way to make wealth without being productive, right? And so my point is is that, so like you said in your interview with Glazer that it's like, okay, the Googleplex, like the value of that real estate is probably not, you know, compared that to like the market cap of Google. But now compare the value of all the real estate in San Francisco to the market caps to some of those companies in there, you know, look at the people who are charging rent to people who work for Google. That's where the money's actually going, is that, and, and, you know, investors talk about this is that it's like, I have to, like, if you earn $100,000 in San Francisco as a family of four, you are below the poverty line, right? You know, the money is going to basically upper middle class Americans and upper class Americans who own tons of residential land and are basically, and also the old and the wealthy, especially, are essentially this entire class of kind of hidden landed gentry that are extracting wealth from the most productive people in America and young people, especially. And, and it is creates really weird patterns, especially with like service workers who can't afford to live in the cities where their work is demanded. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:43:30: Yeah. Okay. So what do you think of this take? This might be economically efficient. In fact, I think it probably is economically efficient, but the effect of the land value tax would be to shift, to basically shift our sort of societal subsidy away from upper middle class people who own, happen to own land in urban areas and shift that to the super wealthy and also super productive people who will like control the half acre that Google owns and like mountain view. So it's kind of like a subsidy, not subsidy, but it's easing the burden on super productive companies like Google and so that they can make even cooler products in the future. But it is in some sense that's a little aggressive, you're going from upper middle class to like, you know, tech billionaire, right? But it's still be economically efficient to do that. Lars Doucet - 00:44:18: Well, no, I don't quite agree with that because it's like, although there are a lot of upper middle class Americans who own a lot of the land wealth, it's not the case that they own where the majority of the land wealth is. The majority of the land wealth in urban areas is actually in commercial real estate. Is the central business district, if you, and I work in mass appraisal, so I've seen this myself in the models we build is that if you look at the transactions in cities and then you plot where the land value is and like a graph, it looks like this. And this is the city center and that's not a residential district. So the residential districts are sucking up a lot of land value and the rent is toodamn high. But the central business district and this even holds even in the age of Zoom, it's taken a tumble, but it's starting from a very high level. That central residential, I'm not residential, but commercial real estate is super valuable. Like orders, like an order of magnitude more valuable than a lot of the other stuff. And a lot of it is very poorly used.In Houston especially, it's incredibly poorly used. We have all these central parking lots downtown. That is incredibly valuable real estate. And just a couple of speculators are just sitting on it, doing nothing with it. And that could be housing, that could be offices, that could be amenities, that could be a million sorts of things. And so when you're talking about a land value tax, those are the people who are going to get hit first. And those are people who are neither nice, nice, friendly upper middle class Americans, nor are they hardworking industrialists making cool stuff. They're people who are doing literally nothing. Now, if you do a full land value tax, yeah, it's going to shift the burden in society somewhat. But I feel that most analyses of property taxes and land value taxes that conclude that they are regressive, I think that's mostly done on the basis of our current assessments. And I feel like our assessments could be massively approved and that if we improve the assessments, we can show where most of our land values actually concentrated. And then we can make decisions about exactly, are we comfortable with these tax shifts? Dwarkesh Patel - 00:46:18: Yeah, yeah. Hey guys, I hope you're enjoying the conversation so far. If you are, I would really, really appreciate it if you could share the episode with other people who you think might like it. Put the episode in a group chat you have with your friends, post it on Twitter, send it to somebody who think might like it. All of those things helps that a ton. Anyways, back to the conversation. So a while back I read this book, how Asia works. You know,Lars Doucet - 00:46:45: I'm a fan. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:46:47: Yeah, and one of the things, I think Joseph Steadwell was going out there, what are the things he talks about is he's trying to explain why some Asian economies grew, gangbusters in the last 20th century. And one of the things he points to is that these economies implemented land reform were basically, I guess they were distributed land away from, I guess the existing aristocracy and gentry towards the people who are like working the land. And while I was reading the book at the time, I was kind of confused because, you know, we've like, there's something called like the Kostian. The Kostian, I forget the name of the argument. Basically, the idea is, regardless of who initially starts off with a resource, the incentive of that person will be to, for him to like give that resource, lend out that resource to be worked by that person who can make most productive use of it. And instead of what was pointing out that these like small, you know, like these peasant farmers basically, they will pay attention to detail of crop rotation and making the maximum use of this land to get like the maximum produce. Whereas if you're like a big landowner, you will just like try to do something mechanized. It's not nearly as effective. And in a poor country, what you have is a shitton of labor. So you want something that's like labor intensive. Anyways, backing up a bit, I was confused while I was reading the book because I was like, well, wouldn't the, wouldn't, what you would expect to happen in a market that basically the peasants get alone from the bank to work to, I guess, rent out that land. And then they are able to make that land work more productively than the original landowner. Therefore, they are able to like make a profit and everybody benefits basically. Why isn't there a co-scient solution to that? Lars Doucet - 00:48:24: Because any improvement that the peasants make to the land will be a signal to the landowner to increase the rent because of Ricardo's law of rent. Yep. And that's exactly what happened in Ireland when, and George talks about this in progress and poverty, is that a lot of people were like, why was there famine in Ireland? It's because the Irish are bad people. Why didn't they, they're lazy? Why didn't they improve? And it's like because if you improve the land, all that happens is you still are forced into one side of competition and the rent goes out. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:48:50: Yep. OK. That makes sense. Is the goal that the taxes you would collect with the land value tax? Are they meant to replace existing taxes or are they meant to give us more services like UBI? Because they probably can't do both, right? Like you either have to choose getting rid of existing taxes or getting more.. Lars Doucet - 00:49:08: Well, it depends how much UBI you want. You know what I mean? It's like you can, you know, it's a sliding skill. It's like how many taxes do you want to replace versus how much? Like, I mean, you can have a budget there. It's like if you can raise, you know, I show in the book the exact figures of how much I think land value tax could raise. And I forget the exact figures, but like you can pull up a graph and overlay it here of, you know, whether you're talking about the federal level or federal local and state, you know, there's $44 trillion of land value in America. And I believe we can raise about $4 trillion in land rents annually with 100% land value tax. And we would probably do less than that in practice. But even on the low end, I forget what figure I quote for the low end, like you could fully pay for any one of social security, Medicare plus Medicaid together, so the second one is healthcare or defense. Entirely with the lowest estimate of what I think land rents could raise. And then I think you can actually raise more than that because I think, and I give an argument in the book for why I think it's closer to like $4 trillion. And that could pay for all three and have room over for a little bit of extra. And so I mean, it's up to you, like, that's a policy decision of whether you want to spend it on spending, whether you want to spend it on offsetting taxes or whether you want to spend it on UBI. I think the best political solution, because like if I bite the bullet that there might be some regressivity issues left over, you want to do what's called a UBI or what, you know, in George's time was called a citizen's dividend, right? You know, this will smooth over any remaining regressivity issues. And then, but I very much am in favor of getting rid of some of these worst taxes, you know, not just because they have dead weight loss and land value tax doesn't, but also because there's this tantalizing theory called ATCORE- All taxes come out of rent, which suggests that if you reduce other taxes, it increases land values, which means that if it's true in the strongest sense, it means the single tax,right? Land value tax replaced all taxes would always work. And I'm not sure if I buy that, I want to see some empirical evidence, but I think at least some weak form of it holds, so that when you offset other worst taxes, not only do you get rid of the dead weight loss from those, but you also wind up raising at least a little bit more in land value tax revenue. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:51:20: Yes, yeah. I mean, as a libertarian, or I guess somebody who has like libertarian tendencies, my concern would basically be like, this obviously seems better than our current regime of taxing things that are good, basically capital income. But my concern is the way I'm guessing something like this would be implemented is it would be added on top of rather than repealing those taxes. And then, yeah, I guess like we would want to ensure. Lars Doucet - 00:51:44: I get this one a lot. Yeah, no. And so I have, you know, I've been a libertarian in my past, and I have a soft spot for libertarianism. I used to be a Ron Paul guy, I went back in the day for a hot minute. And so I think the thing to suede your concerns there is what is land value tax? It's property tax without a tax on buildings. Yep. So the natural path to actually getting land value tax comes from reforming existing property tax regimes by reducing an entire category of taxation, which is the tax on buildings. And so that's what I think is the most plausible way to get a land value tax, like in Texas here, if we were to start by just capture the same, like what I actually proposed for our first step is not 100% land value tax federally. I don't know, even know how you get to there. I think what you actually do is you start in places like Texas and like here, legalized split-rate property tax, thus, re-tax buildings and land at separate rates, set the rate on buildings to zero, collect the same dollar amount of taxes. Let's start there. There's proposals to do this in various cities around the nation right now. I think there's one in Virginia. There's a proposal to do in Detroit. I think there's some talk of it in Pennsylvania and some places. And I'd like to see those experiments run and observe what happens there. I think we should do it in Texas. And that would be something that I think would be very friendly to the libertarian mindset, because very clearly we're no new revenue, right? And we're exempting an entire category of taxation. Most people are gonna see savings on their tax bill and the people who own those parking lots downtown in Houston are gonna be paying most of the bill. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:53:14: Yeah, by the way, what do you make of, is there a good, Georgist's critique of government itself? In a sense that government is basically the original land squatter and it's basically charging the rest of us rents or staying on rent that. It's neither productively improving. As much as at least it's getting rents or must work. Like if you think about, even your landlord usually is not charging you 40%, which is what the income tax rate is in America, right? And it's like almost, you can view the land lord of America. Lars Doucet - 00:53:46: Well, I mean, it's like, I mean, if you wanna take the full, like if you're asking is Georgism compatible with full anarcho capitalist libertarianism, probably not 100%, I think we can have a little government as a treat. But I think it's not a coincidence that if you look throughout America's founding, I don't think it's a coincidence that originally, like people talk about it's like, oh, it used to be only white men who could vote. White land-owning men could vote. Like a government by the landowners for the landowners of the landowners, right? And that's very much kind of the traditional English system of government, just neo-feudalism, right? And so I think Georgism certainly has a critique of that, that it's like government is often instituted to protect the interests of landowners. But what's interesting is that if you look throughout history, I'm very much a fan of democracy, rule of the people. And it's like, I think we, you know, I kind of sympathize with Milton Friedman here, where he's like, you know, he might want to have less government than we have now, but he doesn't believe we can have no government. And then he goes on to endorse, you know, the land value taxes, the least worse tax, because income tax especially, I feel like is a gateway drug to the surveillance state, you know, one of the advantages of land value taxes you don't even care necessarily who owns the land. You're just like, hey, 4732 Apple Street, make sure the check shows up in the mail. I don't care how many shell companies in the Bahamas, you've like obscured your identity with, just put the check in the mail, Mr. Address, you know, whereas the income tax needs to do this full anal probe on everyone in the country, and then audits the poor at a higher rate than the rich, and it's just this horrible burden we have, and then it'll, it gives the government this kind of presumed right to know what you're doing about everything you're doing in this massive invasion of privacy.Dwarkesh Patel - 00:55:42: Yeah, no, that's fascinating. I speak to you, I have shell companies in the Bahamas, by the way. Yes. There's an interesting speculation about what would happen if crypto really managed to divorce and private, I guess, make private your log of transactions or whatever. And then, I guess the idea is the only legible thing left to the government is land, right? So it would like force the government to institute a land value tax, because like you can't tax income or capital gains anymore, that's all on like the blockchain and the right, right? It's cured in some way. And yeah, yeah, so that, I mean, it's like crypto the gateway drug to George's own, because it'll just move income and capital to the other realm. Lars Doucet - 00:56:20: Yeah, it's just so weird. I've gone on record as being a pretty big crypto skeptic. But I have noticed a lot of crypto people get into Georgism home. I mean, not the least of which is Vitalik Buterin and you endorse my book, who's a huge fan of Georgism home. It's like, I'll take fans from anywhere, even from people I've had sparring contests with. I'm generally pretty skeptical that crypto can fulfill all its promises. I am excited by those promises, and if they can prove me wrong, that would be great. And I think there's some logic to what you're saying is that if we literally couldn't track transactions, then I mean, I guess we don't have much the tracks accept land. I don't think that'll actually come to pass just based off of recent events. You know, and that's basically my position on it. But I have noticed a lot of crypto people, just they're some of the easiest people to convince about George's home, which was completely surprising to me. But I've learned a lot by talking to them. It's very interesting and weird. Yeah, yeah. Dwarkesh Patel - 00:57:16: So there was some other interesting questions from Twitter. Ramon Dario Iglesias asks, how do you transition from a world today where many Americans have homes where it really starts sparring to have homes to a world where, I mean, obviously, it would be like a different regime. They might still have homes, but who knows? Like, their property will be just be like, think I thought I'm going to complete a different way. How do you transition to that? Like, what would that transition look like for most Americans? Lars Doucet - 00

Our host, Dr. Ibrahima Dramé earned a Ph.D. in International Political Economy from the University of Tsukuba in Japan. Dr. Marty Rowland earned his Ph.D. in Natural Resource Economics from the University of New Orleans. He has taught at various institutions, such as Pace University and here at the Henry George School of Social Science. Dan Sullivan is a Georgist scholar, former President of the Council of Georgist Organizations (CGO), and Director of Saving Communities, a Pennsylvania-based association that promotes fiscal integrity and economic justice. Ms. Denise Favorule is a licensed Real Estate Broker at the Corcoran Group. Dr. Gevorkyan received his Ph.D. in economics from the New School. He is a Subject Matter Expert on Macroeconomics at the Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, a Research Fellow at the Center for Global Business Stewardship, as well as a professor of economics at St. John's University. Together we discussed traffic congestion pricing policy, its impacts on low- and middle-income households, and different alternatives that could improve living standards in New York. To check out more of our content, including our research, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/

Scott Baker is the president of Common Ground-NYC, a Georgist group focusing on social justice and economic equity for all. He is also a blogger for the Huffington Post, as well as the OpEdNews. He has written dozens of articles regarding land speculation and how to improve the real estate market. Together we discussed the economics of real estate, how land value taxes can generate more equal opportunity, and why New York was able to achieve a building boom in the 1920s but not now. To check out more of our content, including our research, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/

This week we are talking to Martim Smolka, the man who has been the director of the Latin American and Caribbean program at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy since it was made, 27 years ago. This is no minor thing: four of our guests on this podcast have worked or published with the Lincoln Institute, and its impact on Latin American land policy is profound - Martim has truly played an important role in the history of land policy in Latin American cities. In this episode, Flavia Leite and I talk with Martim about the Georgist theoretical underpinnings of progressive land policy, the history of these policies in Latin American cities, and why TIF may well be understood as the “anti-christ” of land value capture. On the subject of TIF, check out Flavia and Bridget Fisher's critical analysis of the camouflaged risks and costs of TIF in Hudson Yards that we mention in the episode: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0264275122001007 Martim is a Brazilian economist, with a Ph.D. in Regional Science from the University of Pennsylvania (1980). He was the director of the Program on Latin America and the Caribbean at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy for 27 years. At the LILP he developed (and lectured in) many educational programs for high-level public officials, members of academia, NGOs leaders and other professionals throughout Latin America. Flávia is a PhD student in City & Regional Planning at UC Berkeley. Her research interest revolves around the relationship between formal and informal housing markets, with a specific focus on housing financialization, access to credit, and housing policy in Latin America.

Dr. Lough earned her Ph.D. from Brandeis University in American history, specializing in cultural, political, and social movements. Her dissertation was titled "The Last Tax: Henry George and the Social Politics of Land Reform." She is the former director of the Henry George Birthplace, Archive, and Historical Center. She is the author of "The Annotated Works of Henry George," a commentary on George's seminal works; "Social Problems" (1883) and "The Condition of Labor" (1891). Dr. Lough joined the Henry George School to discuss Henry George's life, how other economists responded to George's philosophy, and how local decision-makers implemented Georgist ideas into their policy. To check out more of our content, including our research, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/

Jeff received a linguistics degree from California State University. Mr. Smith is a Georgist scholar and social justice activist who has promoted Georgist policies throughout his career. Mr. Smith is the author of "Counting Bounty," a book that examines the economic value of land and all of the earth's natural resources. He served as the Director of Education at Basic Economic Education in San Diego and was the Chief Editor at Progress.org, a blog that promotes progressive policy perspectives. Jeff is also known for publishing "The Geonomist," which won a California Greenlight award. He has helped the city of Portland research new transportation policies and is a member of the International Society for Ecological Economics. Mr. Smith joined us to discuss how he helped form the Green Party in California, how progressive activist groups can build sustainable political momentum, and how Universal Basic Income may not be as helpful as some policymakers think. To check out more of our content, including our research, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Georgism, in theory, published by Stuart Armstrong on June 15, 2022 on LessWrong. Last year, Astral Codex had a series of interesting posts on Georgism. The claims felt very counterintuitive to me, so I dove into it until I could at least sort out the theory. And I emerged with a better understanding, which I think would be useful to share here. Key points: In theory at least, Georgism is correct that a land tax will not cause rents to rise. Land will become cheaper to buy, and there will be more pressure to use it in an economically viable way. The economy as whole will benefit. However, a land tax will not cause rents to fall, either. Indirectly, the better economy may cause them to rise, in fact. For those who are deep into economic models, you can see a Georgist land tax as causing a deadweight loss in a situation of perfectly inelastic supply - ie no deadweight loss at all, and all the tax will be paid by the inelastic supplier. For a longer explanation, here's the rest of the post. Marginal rents and taxes Adage: If you want less of something, tax it. Quick quiz: if you tax cars, does their purchase price go up or down? Well, if you put a sales tax, paid when the car is bought, then the price will go up. If you put a road tax, paid every year by the car owner[1], then the price will go down (since it's now more expensive to own the car, hence less interesting to buy it in the first place). Second quiz: suppose you have a nice community of a hundred renters, in identical homes. The rents are reasonable, and everyone renting is much happier to live here than anywhere else. What will happen to the rents? They will rise, of course. As long as everyone renting prefers to live here than anywhere else, then they will continue to stay here even as the rents rise. And so, rise they will. And they will continue to rise until... until someone living here finds them too high, and moves away. At that point, they stop rising[2]. So the rent price is determined by the person who is just on the edge of moving away. In economics, this is what they refer to when they talk about the “marginal buyer[3]”: the gal or guy who thinks “this is not a very good deal; I could go either way on it”. That unsatisfied marginal renter is the one that determines the price. And, once the prices have reached this level, the landlords can no longer raise rents. Maybe I pay €1,000 for a rental that I value at €1,500. Then the landlord might be tempted to charge me, say, €1,250. But if they do so, then I can just go to another landlord and offer them €1,125, which they will accept. Because of this, my landlord will not raise my rent. If we ignore transaction costs and moving costs then the same will happen if my landlord increase the rent to €1,002: I'll offer another landlord €1,001. So if my landlord wants to have anyone in their house at all, they have to price it at €1,000, like everyone else[4]. What happens if we charge a yearly tax to all the landlords in the community? Well, some of them will decide to move out of the rental business, there won't be as many rental properties, rents will rise and... Ok, what happens if we charge a tax to all the landowners in the community? Then landlords won't move out of the rental business, as that doesn't gain them anything. And they can't raise rents. Those are still determined by the marginal renters: if the landlords increase rents, their properties will stand empty. Ok, so rents won't rise. What about land prices? These will fall. Just as with road tax example above, if owning land is less profitable, then it will be less expensive[5]. I haven't said anything about the level of this yearly tax. You don't want it so high that the landowners just abandon their land; but any amount below that will do. This is where the “ground rent” tax comes in: over th...

Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Georgism, in theory, published by Stuart Armstrong on June 15, 2022 on LessWrong. Last year, Astral Codex had a series of interesting posts on Georgism. The claims felt very counterintuitive to me, so I dove into it until I could at least sort out the theory. And I emerged with a better understanding, which I think would be useful to share here. Key points: In theory at least, Georgism is correct that a land tax will not cause rents to rise. Land will become cheaper to buy, and there will be more pressure to use it in an economically viable way. The economy as whole will benefit. However, a land tax will not cause rents to fall, either. Indirectly, the better economy may cause them to rise, in fact. For those who are deep into economic models, you can see a Georgist land tax as causing a deadweight loss in a situation of perfectly inelastic supply - ie no deadweight loss at all, and all the tax will be paid by the inelastic supplier. For a longer explanation, here's the rest of the post. Marginal rents and taxes Adage: If you want less of something, tax it. Quick quiz: if you tax cars, does their purchase price go up or down? Well, if you put a sales tax, paid when the car is bought, then the price will go up. If you put a road tax, paid every year by the car owner[1], then the price will go down (since it's now more expensive to own the car, hence less interesting to buy it in the first place). Second quiz: suppose you have a nice community of a hundred renters, in identical homes. The rents are reasonable, and everyone renting is much happier to live here than anywhere else. What will happen to the rents? They will rise, of course. As long as everyone renting prefers to live here than anywhere else, then they will continue to stay here even as the rents rise. And so, rise they will. And they will continue to rise until... until someone living here finds them too high, and moves away. At that point, they stop rising[2]. So the rent price is determined by the person who is just on the edge of moving away. In economics, this is what they refer to when they talk about the “marginal buyer[3]”: the gal or guy who thinks “this is not a very good deal; I could go either way on it”. That unsatisfied marginal renter is the one that determines the price. And, once the prices have reached this level, the landlords can no longer raise rents. Maybe I pay €1,000 for a rental that I value at €1,500. Then the landlord might be tempted to charge me, say, €1,250. But if they do so, then I can just go to another landlord and offer them €1,125, which they will accept. Because of this, my landlord will not raise my rent. If we ignore transaction costs and moving costs then the same will happen if my landlord increase the rent to €1,002: I'll offer another landlord €1,001. So if my landlord wants to have anyone in their house at all, they have to price it at €1,000, like everyone else[4]. What happens if we charge a yearly tax to all the landlords in the community? Well, some of them will decide to move out of the rental business, there won't be as many rental properties, rents will rise and... Ok, what happens if we charge a tax to all the landowners in the community? Then landlords won't move out of the rental business, as that doesn't gain them anything. And they can't raise rents. Those are still determined by the marginal renters: if the landlords increase rents, their properties will stand empty. Ok, so rents won't rise. What about land prices? These will fall. Just as with road tax example above, if owning land is less profitable, then it will be less expensive[5]. I haven't said anything about the level of this yearly tax. You don't want it so high that the landowners just abandon their land; but any amount below that will do. This is where the “ground rent” tax comes in: over th...

The March Consumer Price Index is out and it's bad. Here's what that means for the Biden administration, which blames Putin for the volatility. Hawaii Rep. Kaiali'i Kahele has a day job - he's a pilot for Hawaiian Airlines. His lack of in-person voting has caused scrutiny into how he spends his time and what legislation he supports. Andrew Heaton (The Political Orphanage) joins the show with Tax Day fast approaching to talk the implications of working for oneself, Georgist tax policy, and politics of tax reform.

Ted Gwartney was the executive director of the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation, an organization that promotes the ideas of Henry George. He has worked as a land assessor both domestically and internationally, where he learned to optimize land values in order to create robust funding for government projects. Ted has written several pieces on land assessment and real estate policy. Mr. Gwartney joined us to discuss how his experiences in land assessment influenced his Georgist philosophy, land and real estate policy, and how speculation can deter healthy economic growth. To check out more of our content, including our research, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/

Fred Foldvary received his Bachelor's from UC Berkeley and his Master's and Ph.D. in economics from George Mason University. He taught at Virginia Tech, Santa Clara University, and San Jose State. Mr. Foldvary was a research fellow at the Independent Institute and is the author of several books on economics. Dr. Foldvary joins us to discuss his examination of the business cycle and how he predicted the Great Recession, what fuels boom and bust cycles, and how to counteract the negative effects of offshoring. To check out more of our content, including our research, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/

Patrick Condon joins us this week for our discussion on sustainable urban planning. Mr. Condon received his master's in landscape architecture from Umass Amherst and has over 25 years of experience in sustainable urban design. Patrick started his academic career in 1985 at the University of Minnesota before moving to the University of British Columbia in 1992. After acting as the director of the landscape architecture program, he became the James Taylor Chair in Landscape and Liveable Environments. As Chair, he worked to advance sustainable urban design in numerous neighborhoods in the US, Canada, and Australia. Mr. Condon's newest book, Sick City: Disease, Race, Inequality, and Urban Land, features throughout our discussion and is available online. Together we discussed different housing policies across the world, Georgist land taxes, and how cities and towns can become more sustainable.

Farmland has transformed into a financial asset class. So, what happens when land is owned by large financial institutions? How does it impact farmer autonomy? And could it be good for fighting climate change? Dr. Madeleine Fairbairn is Associate Professor of Environmental Studies at UC Santa Cruz and author of Fields of Gold: Financing the Global Land Rush. On this episode of Reversing Climate Change, Dr. Fairbairn joins Ross and guest cohost Dr. Lauren Gifford to discuss the emergence of the institutional farmland investments industry and describe how land has value independent of what it produces. Dr. Fairbairn explores what's behind the steep decline in the number of farmers over the last century and explains how large-scale farmland ownership could have positive consequences for the environment and negative social consequences at the same time. Listen in for Dr. Fairbairn's insights into Georgism as a potential policy response and find out what the financialization of farmland means for the small farmer, the economy and the climate. Key Takeaways [1:40] How Fields of Gold explores the emergence of the institutional farmland investments industry [5:24] What Dr. Fairbairn means by ‘the financialization of land' [9:25] The non-linear progression from communal forms of land ownership to a more and more sophisticated commodification of land [11:51] How land has value independent of what it produces [13:52] What's behind the decline in the number of farmers over the last century [18:01] The connections between the financialization of farmland and climate (and how what we ask of farmland managers is changing) [21:12] How large-scale farmland ownership could have positive environmental consequences and negative social consequences at the same time [26:18] How landowners in Brazil are tasked with serving society as a whole [30:31] How Dr. Fairbairn thinks about billionaires like Bill Gates acquiring hundreds of thousands of acres of land [34:03] Dr. Fairbairn's take on a Georgist land value tax as a potential policy response [40:03] The relationship between Georgism and the politics of productivity [42:37] What Dr. Fairbairn is learning about agri-food technology through the UC AFTeR Project she's working on now Resources Dr. Fairbairn at UC Santa Cruz Dr. Fairbairn on Twitter Fields of Gold: Financing the Global Land Rush by Madeleine Fairbairn Dr. Lauren Gifford USDA Discrimination Lawsuits ‘Bill Gates: America's Top Farmland Owner' in The Land Report Billionaire Wilderness: The Ultra-Wealthy and the Remaking of the American West by Justin Farrell The Mason Gaffney Reader: Essays on Solving the ‘Unsolvable' by Mason Gaffney Radical Markets: Uprooting Capitalism and Democracy for a Just Society by Eric A. Posner and E. Glen Weyl --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/reversingclimatechange/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/reversingclimatechange/support

In this episode Dan Sullivan examines how our tax systems responded in the light of the pandemic and draws lessons as to how we should raise public revenue for prosperity, sustainability and fiscal resilience. Dan Sullivan is a Georgist scholar, former President of the Council of Georgist Organizations (CGO), and Director of Saving Communities, a Pennsylvania-based association that promotes fiscal integrity and economic justice.

"It's a Wonderful Life" (1946, Frank Capra) is a Christmas classic, but also offers a great deal of insight into 20th century urban issues, the ideology of self-improvement through homeownership, lines of credit, and ex-urban sprawl. Do we live in George Bailey's world today, and what does this mean for us?

Our final radio show on 3CR sees Karl going out on a win, discussing Victoria's Windfall Gains Tax legislation that passed last week. Along the way you'll hear analysis of Australia's record land price inflation, why we need to switch taxes off the productive sector and onto monopoly interests plus a statement from Saul Eslake at the Housing Affordability and Supply Inquiry on how the mechanics of a land tax works. We finish up admiring the founders of 3CR and their establishment of long term community infrastructure and its parallels to Georgist thinking. Long live the beloved airwaves of 3CR. Show notes

https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/model-city-monday-11821 Telosa, USA Bloomberg: The Diapers.com Guy Wants To Build A Utopian Megalopolis Marc Lore founded diapers.com, various other internet startups, served a stint as Wal-Mart's e-commerce director, and made a few billion dollars. Now he wants to start a city with a new vision of socially responsible democracy. Why move to this city instead of one of the many existing cities which are not in deserts and, you know, actually exist? Lore's pitch is that Telosa (working name) will be inclusive and sustainable by following a Georgist model: all the land will be held in a community-owned trust, and all profits will go to social services.

Karl celebrates 600 episodes with a walk through economic history over the last 14 years of the show, highlighting some of the key aspects of Georgist economics along the way. How's this: wealth must flow to those who employ and create rather than those who hoard and wait. Show notes

Every now and then, our Dudes stumble onto a topic by chance. This week, Erin and Nicole planned to talk about how contentious the game of Monopoly can be, some of the longest games ever played, and some of the worst franchised boards (KISS Monopoly, anyone?). They talk about all that stuff, but the big surprise was the story of Lizzie Magie, the inventor of Monopoly. She was a feminist, a Georgist, a writer, an activist - so many amazing things. And she was 100% d*cked over by Parker Brothers and some douche who would go on to make a MILLION DOLLARS for her idea.SHOW INFORMATIONHosted and produced by Nicole Mackie and Erin Saul, as part of the Whohaha Podcast NetworkMerch: Dude, That's F****d Up StorePatreon: Patreon.com/DTFUPodcastFacebook Page: @DFTUPodcastFacebook Group: Listeners of Dude, That's F****d UpInstagram: @DTFUPodcastTwitter: @DTFUPodcastYouTube: DTFUPodcastWebsite: DTFUPodcast.comEmail: DTFUPodcast@gmail.comMusic: The Hands of StoneArtwork: Brad Walters DesignSubscribe: Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Google PodcastsSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/book-review-contest-winners Thanks to everyone who participated or voted in the Book Review Contest. The winners are: FIRST PLACE: Progress and Poverty, reviewed by Lars Doucet Lars is a Norwegian-Texan game designer, and you can read his game design blog here. He's a pretty serious Georgist and posts regularly in the Georgism subreddit. SECOND PLACE: Down And Out In Paris And London, reviewed by Whimsi Whimsi blogs here, but otherwise asks to remain mysterious. THIRD PLACE: On The Natural Faculties, reviewed by ELP. E is a researcher and an author of the blog Slime Mold Time Mold READERS' CHOICE AWARD: Disunited Nations vs. Dawn Of Eurasia, reviewed by Misha Saul Misha is an investor in Sydney, Australia, and blogs here. And congratulations to all other finalists (here listed in order of appearance), whose secret identities were: Order Without Law, reviewed by Phil Hazelden Are We Smart Enough To Know How Smart Animals Are, reviewed by Jeff Russell Why Buddhism Is True, reviewed by Eve Bigaj Double Fold, reviewed by Boštjan P The Wizard And The Prophet, reviewed by Maryana Through The Eye Of A Needle, reviewed by Tom Powell Years Of Lyndon Johnson, reviewed by Theodore Ehrenborg Addiction By Design, reviewed by Ketchup Duck The Accidental Superpower, reviewed by John B Humankind, reviewed by Neil R The Collapse Of Complex Societies, reviewed by Etirabys Where's My Flying Car, reviewed by Jonathan P How Children Fail, reviewed by HonoreDB Plagues And Peoples, reviewed by Joel Ferris (who is looking for a job, email here) All finalists win a permanent free subscription to Astral Codex Ten - since a subscription costs $10/month, this is technically an infinity dollar value! If you already have a subscription, you are now a Super Double Mega-Subscriber, which has no consequences in the material world, but several important metaphysical advantages. I should have already credited this to your email addresses; please let me know if it didn't go through or if I used the wrong address.

If the 1% are amassing their wealth through ownership of unproductive land, and if idle, abandoned land is a blight on our communities, how can we kill both birds with one Georgist stone?

This is the latest in my series of podcasts explaining how economics works in the credit crunch and now virus pandemic era. This week I give my thoughts on the implications of the Bank of England issuing a digital currency. What debt costs will be on the 750 billion area EU rescue plan? Also will the Georgist policy be applied?

ALGUS JA OTS! Kuna inimeste lõkkeplatsidel ähvardab alata lõbus jaanipäev, siis on paras aeg rääkida Otsast. Loomulikult meie suurimast jaanipäevalegendist Georg Otsast. JUKU Raadio 313. köögilauas võtab seetõttu platsi Kulle Raig, kes teab Georgist kõike, kuna on avaldanud sel teemal mitmeid raamatuid. Uurime välja, kes see klassikaliselt kuulus taat tegelikult oli.

In the US we only need 1% of the population to grow all the food. 7% for manufacturing. That leaves a lot of untapped human resources. What comes next is a political choice.

Our guest is the OG of MMT. Listeners always appreciate Warren Mosler’s ability to slice through to the clear and practical fiscal implication of any policy consideration. Today he talks to Steve about the deflationary bias of Medicare for All, the countercyclical effects of a federal job guarantee, how to apportion the resources that will be freed up by M4A, and why it makes sense to replace the income tax with some kind of asset tax.     You don’t need a degree in economics to understand why expanding Medicare’s coverage from age 65 to age zero will result in an immediate reduction in overall spending on healthcare. Warren estimates $600 billion in savings. Meanwhile at least 5 million jobs will be lost. Economists call it a massive “positive productivity shock.” Whenever you can produce the same amount of goods or services for less money, it’s good for the economy, despite the job loss. Now those people can be deployed for something more useful than the advertising, marketing, and administrative tasks of private insurance companies.     With M4A, the costs for private firms drop because they’re no longer buying medical coverage for their employees. This is another good thing. There’s no sensible reason for the cost of healthcare to be built into the cost of products; business expenses go down substantially, putting downward pressure on prices. It’s a deflationary event.     The two things described above - increased unemployment and downward pressure on prices - work together to reduce inflation. As Warren says, “when you have that kind of impulse you don’t raise taxes or cut spending to offset it. That’s nonsensical. It just makes it worse.”     Eventually moving to M4A could have inflationary effects, but Warren explains the importance of timing. We have to think about what happens on “day one.” People and firms will have more money in their pockets because they don’t have to buy healthcare. Ultimately they’ll begin spending some of it. Increased consumer demand will cause prices to rise; corporations might increase production. But these effects don’t play out immediately. So, again, it’s ridiculous to start with a huge tax to offset the inflation that hasn’t yet occurred. There will be time to decide what’s needed.     In light of the number of people who will become unemployed from M4A, Steve asks whether it makes more sense to have the Federal Job Guarantee in place first. This leads to a broader discussion of the FJG. Warren compares it to the joke that says, to avoid being eaten “I don’t have to outrun the bear; I only have to outrun you.” The FJG doesn’t have to be perfect; it only has to be better than unemployment. There are no economic criteria where it's worse than unemployment, so even if it's merely equal, economically, we should do it because by every other measure it's superior.     Mosler has always maintained that it must be transitional, while some MMT proponents see it as a chance to expand the public sector workforce, including within a Green New Deal. Despite some disagreements, the conversation has brought MMT awareness into the mainstream. This is a huge plus.     Once we get past the household analogy for the federal budget we can begin determining priorities for allocating resources, including labor. The US needs less than 1% of the population to grow all the food and 7% for manufacturing. Our productivity gains give us the luxury of allowing more time to be spent taking care of each other - with education, research, healthcare, and infrastructure, for example. In assessing the value of government expenditure, we aren’t limited to old notions of productivity. Solar energy requires more man-hours to produce than an equal amount of energy from coal, but that’s no reason to continue using coal. When planning for the public purpose we can take the greater good into account.     Warren Mosler’s books are available on his website: http://moslereconomics.com/    @wbmosler on Twitter

OK its back to the Georgist podcourse, this month looking at Green economics in the context of the green new deal. Along the way we look at the yellow jackets movement, Australia’s carbon tax history, the pros and cons of the various carbon pricing systems and then look at the holistic reform needed to unify carbon taxes with inequality, sprawl and resource plundering. Thanks to AOC for the sound grabs. Show notes

This is the seventh edition of our Georgist podcourse and again we delve into another form of power. Intellectual property has become a huge part of our lives as we tip toe in between patents, copyrights and trademarks. Have these been construed too much in favour of the innovator? Or are there other factors establishing the barriers to competition? Regular themes again pop up as we digest Georgist perspectives on property from another vantage point. Remember 'Everything is a Remix!' Great doco.Show Notes.

Now we get down to the practicalities in the 5th Georgist podcourse. We discuss the best practices for ensuring the pathway to custodianship over consumerism is possible. Geeky but essential, the local and state government policy levers are presented as counter-manoeuvres to established political and economic thought. Check the show notes for links to important research.

Karl takes us through the 4th episode of the Renegade's Georgist podcourse, with a call out to your inner tax geek. Adam Smith's Canons of Taxation provide a backdrop for analysing the need for beneficiary pays to be more prominent in tax reform analysis. We finish with the Marxist distraction away from the necessary analysis of monopoly power.  Show notes.

The Renegades Podcourse #3: Land is the central tenet of Georgist understanding, but yet our most valuable asset is ignored in economics, ignored in the policy setting - unless it starts to falter. Land represents natural resources above and below us. It also represents land-like assets, that share a similar natural monopoly status. So it is crucial to determining both wealth distribution and societal efficiencies. Let’s dig in deeper. A short clip is included featuring Jacob Schwartz-Lucas on the key ingredient - the law of rent. Show notes.

Part 2 of Karl’s Georgist course - the key essentials to understanding behind this timeless philosophy. We discuss first principles including birth rights, primary factors of production, justice, liberty and the importance of effective redistribution policy. Why is the most essential aspect to life on earth ignored by economics? Show notes.

Dave Giesen (Henry George School of Social Sciences, San Fran) discusses the latest round of efforts to help the homeless. Will a tax on Silicon Valley unicorns make a lasting difference? So many people are feeling the precarity but so few grasp the Georgist story. Earth Rights are Birth Rights. Instead the cry of humanity continues to slip back towards sharecropping. Cheery as always, we hope this helps you read between the lines. Show notes 

“If you are a couple and one of you has to dedicate your entire wage for the next 25 years on the mortgage, what difference is that to slavery?” Mark Hassed takes us through his core Georgist understandings. Along the way we discuss subtle slavery, the School of Philosophy, Crown Casino, resource ripoffs and tax avoidance. Charming but essential understandings as always.  Show notes

On a freezing day Karl digs into the archives with Paraic Lally giving his elevator pitch on all things Georgist. Then we go back to an interview with Silicon Valley commons coder Max Carlson to discuss the evolving influence of the digital era. Is there a way to reduce the immense profits enjoyed by FAGA (Facebook, Apple, Google and Amazon)? Do any of Karl’s tech reforms muster a pass from Max? Show notes

It's a Target Kids takeover this episode of Earful, as we lurk within internet-only radio signals under the cover of a volleyball game. We break down the fifth five minutes, from assessing business proposals, juggling pizza, to examining the forgotten B-side of the Big Bopper's biggest bop. Also featuring detailed economic analysis of the bartender game through a Georgist lens, andeven cameos from Trump AND Clinton! Guest for "With Fresh Eyes": Trevor Adamo, who has useful information on comics-related websites to visit.

We talk about 19th century beefs in the Catholic church, the excommunication of Georgist priests, and how modern Catholics view economic principles.

Karl celebrates 10 years on air before delving into a revelation that the Queen is a Georgist. Listen to how she behaves. Now dear landlord - follow her lead!Give me a 10th birthday present by saying hello - renegades@earthsharing.org.au or by reviewing the show on itunes. 3 reviews in 10 years - should we continue?Show notes - http://www.earthsharing.org.au/2017/09/follow-the-queens-lead/

Ted Gwartney is a long-time tax assessor for the Town of Greenwich, CT who is well-regarded in the Georgist community. Over his career Gwartney has also been the assessor for the cities of Bridgeport, CT; Hartford, CT; and Southfield, MI. He has also served as the Executive Director of the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation and worked as a land valuation consultant in Russia and the former Soviet Republics. On the show we discuss how land fees are vastly superior ways to collect revenue than taxation. Subscribe to PRIMO NUTMEG to never miss a new episode! www.primonutmeg.com/ www.youtube.com/c/primonutmeg/ www.patreon.com/primonutmeg www.soundcloud.com/primonutmeg www.vid.me/PRIMONUTMEG www.facebook.com/primonutmeg/ www.twitter.com/primonutmeg/ www.instagram.com/primonutmeg/Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/primonutmeg)

Mason Gaffney is a long-time Professor of Economics at the University of California, Riverside who is well-known in the Georgist community. After he served in W.W. II, he obtained his Ph.D. in Economics at Berkeley. On the show we will go into the history and philosophy of Henry George and the land tax. http://www.masongaffney.org/ Subscribe to PRIMO NUTMEG to never miss a new episode! https://www.primonutmeg.com/ https://youtube.com/c/primonutmeg/ https://www.patreon.com/primonutmeg https://soundcloud.com/primonutmeg https://vid.me/PRIMONUTMEG https://facebook.com/primonutmeg/ https://twitter.com/primonutmeg/ https://instagram.com/primonutmeg/Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/primonutmeg)

Nicolaus Tideman is a leading Georgist economist and professor of economics at Virginia Tech. He received his Ph.D. in Economics from the University of Chicago in 1969. Over his career he has been an assistant professor and a research associate at Harvard University, as well as a visiting scholar at the American Institute for Economic Research. On the show he explains Georgism and compares it to other political and economic schools. Subscribe to PRIMO NUTMEG to never miss a new episode! https://www.primonutmeg.com/ https://youtube.com/c/primonutmeg/ https://www.patreon.com/primonutmeg https://soundcloud.com/primonutmeg https://vid.me/PRIMONUTMEG https://facebook.com/primonutmeg/ https://twitter.com/primonutmeg/ https://instagram.com/primonutmeg/Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/primonutmeg)

Emily Sims, Prosper Australia’s Office manager joins to discuss the imperatives of Georgist philosophical analysis. Why is it a useful tool when analysing affordability, gentrification and the wealth gap? How can both Libertarian and Anarchists find common ground? Listen to find out the key fact to protecting private property rights.Show notes: http://www.earthsharing.org.au/1qM

How to improve population pressures, urbanisation, boom-bust economies, dwindling wages, the burgeoning size of government and the time-poor nature of life? Could a change in economic policy achieve that? The need for Georgist economics could not be more pressing with the world’s most powerful property mogul about to assume the Presidency.  http://www.earthsharing.org.au/1qb

  Dan Sullivan is the director of Saving Communities and president of the Council of Georgist Organizations. For over 35 years he has been making presentations around the world on both the theory and practical applications of Georgism, has been instrumental in winning shifts to land value tax in Pittsburgh and other Western Pennsylvania cities, and has been featured in newspapers and major magazines, including *Fortune.*   "Sullivan has made several studies of the financial impact of higher land taxes on property owners, and speaks at meetings of Pittsburgh neighborhood and business groups to spread the incentive-tax doctrine. Such efforts are crucial. Few people, even among public officials and real estate executives, understand the nature of the tax and its economic ripples." - Gurney Breckenfeld, real estate editor, *Fortune*, August 8, 1983   “Dan Sullivan knows more about tax economics than anyone I know.” - Jack Wagner, Pennsylvania Auditor General   “Dan Sullivan is a competent advocate for the taxpaying public.” - Congressman William Coyne   “Dan Sullivan has a way of slicing through baloney that a deli manager would envy.” - Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Columnist Brian O'Neill  

  We discuss the economist Henry George in this episode. I used the phrase "strange economic creatures" while interviewing Dr. Rochon. It seems like a fitting title for this series. Nate, though he had heroically battled food poisoning by bad pupasa the night before, still mustered the strength to talk about ol' Hank. Below are resources assembled and commented upon by Mr. Blair. Enjoy.   The London Jubilee line was constructed at a cost of 3.5 billion GBP, but the public investment, paid for with public tax money increased the value of nearby land by 13 billion GBP.  If the community had captured the social value it created, the public investment would have paid for itself with 9.5 billion GBP left over.   Free Riders on Public Transport http://vimeo.com/32548658   Neither Capitalism Nor Socialism http://povertythinkagain.com/controversies/a-word-from-the-sponsor-of-the-film-the-end-of-poverty-georgism-capitalism-and-socialism/neither-capitalism-nor-socialism/   Reviving the Idea That Urban Land is Common Wealth http://www.guernicamag.com/daily/rich-nymoen-jeff-smith-reviving-the-idea-that-urban-land-is-common-wealth/   Share the land, keep the fruits of labour http://www.erichthegreen.ca/2014/08/share-land-keep-fruits-of-labour.html   Mason Gaffney Reader http://masongaffneyreader.com/   Re-solving the Economic Puzzle http://www.amazon.com/Re-solving-Economic-Puzzle-Walter-Rybeck/dp/0856832812   Georgism gained popularity as a result of Progress and Poverty: An Inquiry into the Cause of Industrial Depressions and of Increase of Want with Increase of Wealth: The Remedy, 1879. There is a newer modernized and abridged version of P&P (The Drake Version), but if you are motivated, the original is also very good and not hard to read. Free PDF of the modernized Drake Edition: http://www.henrygeorge.org/pdfs/PandP_Drake.pdf Audiobook of the modernized Drake Edition: http://hgchicago.org/links/progress-poverty-audiobook/ Download or listen to the unabridged audiobook: https://librivox.org/progress-and-poverty-by-henry-george/ Various ebook formats for the original: http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/george-progress-and-poverty This is a great browser format (original): http://schalkenbach.org/library/henry-george/p+p/ppcont.html

Land rent, Economic rent: The Earth’s Worth Secretly Supported by Economists: Bryan Kavanagh analyses the Henry Tax Review following Karl’s salvo on global economic issues.On his death in 1988, Hutchinson was succeeded by Bryan Kavanagh. As a professional property valuer and a student of Georgist economics, Kavanagh knew that the land market is characterized by bubble-burst cycles and that the bursts are followed by recessions in the wider economy. On this basis he had predicted, in an article published in The Valuer in July 1987, that the next recession would be in 1991/2. This was correct to within one year. Seeking a reliable method of diagnosing a land bubble, Kavanagh began aggregating statistics on property turnover in the several Australian States since 1972, and eventually noticed that whenever the turnover exceeded 19% of GDP in a nationwide trend, and then returned below 19% (as it always did), recession followed within 2 years. He concluded that the ratio of property turnover to GDP is a veritable barometer of the economy, and that a ratio exceeding 19% indicates an economically damaging bubble. He is therefore unimpressed by the Greenspan doctrine that one cannot recognize a bubble until it bursts. Australian real estate re-entered bubble territory, according to Kavanagh's criterion, in 1999 or 2000.DownloadBryan Kavanagh blogs at the Land Values Research Group: Economics as if location matters (Prosper Australia)Source: Renegade EconomistsAired: 5/5/10 12:00 AMThis podcast is an aggregate of audio files freely available online. Please visit the original source and subscribe to the host website.