This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Apparently the UK's entire net worth was £10.7 trillions in 2020 according to the ONS, their chief statistic agency. What's remarkable is that a whopping 60% of that is "non-produced, non-financial assets".
That's a fancy way of saying land. Why isn't this fact more well known? Should we expect it to be different for other countries? And why aren't more people talking about Georgism?
I don't have a strong opinion about Georgism, but my one area of confusion is that there are ways to live a decadent life without owning a lot of land. In the extreme, a very wealthy person could buy a nine-figure yacht and basically live on it, enjoying a life of luxury beyond avarice without owning a single square foot of land, and hence I suppose without paying any tax. Short of that, an upper middle class person could live in a small but luxurious house and spend lavishly on staff, deliveries, elaborate vacations, etc., and be taxed like his middle class neighbors. Is it a goal of Georgism to encourage that sort of land-lean lifestyle? If so -- why? And if not, how much dead weight loss does it cause to distort people's consumption in that manner?
The explicit goal of Georgism is to encourage productive use of land, and prevent idle land speculation (I.e. someone owning a second property they live in 10% of the year, or holding a vacant lot because they think the price will go up.)
I think this is highly unlikely, unless you go for the idea of 100% LVT and getting rid of all other taxes, which some Georgists believe but to me seems an extreme position.
Both Georgism and the graduated/progressive income tax are methods of taxing proxies for economic activity; both introduce artifacts and market distortions, and both have unwanted ancillary effects on freedom.
I would much rather directly tax economic activity, dimes on the dollar, and give everyone a universal dividend on that activity in place of a tax refund to cover the necessities of life.
In the process:
It would decouple revenue from labor, protecting government funding from the coming automationpocalypse.
It protects freedom because only new goods are taxed, only the first time something goes from being an object of commerce to private property; it can never be taxed again, even if refurbished, rebuilt, and resold. Thrift stores and secondhand stores would be tax free.
It cleans up the various market distortions all the subsidies and loopholes of the income tax have introduced over the years.
Even used homes become immune from being taxed, taking the government out of the speculation game.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link