OK you convinced me, now what?

Identifying relevant facts that support a position is an argument.

No, just disingenuous. As always.

You seem incapable of genuine remorse for your misdeeds:

See?

No, human beings are not capital. That's just more of your neoclassical spew.

 

Crikey, it is impossible to get Georgist grunts to actually refer to any economics. The idea that you can understand economic outcome without reference to labour economics is cretinous. But to you, its the norm!

Try non-Georgism!

 

No, that's just you makin' $#!+ up again.

No, we both know the "comments" you offered on the subject were false and disingenuous.

<yawn> What a waste of perfectly good electrons....

 

How do you go beyond Georgist tax?

I don't expect any sense mind you.

 

Do such vacuous comments really enable you to deceive yourself?

 

It adds another comment that you avoid economics. Its your mainstay

 

I already told you. Many times. As you know perfectly well.

As a result of your introspection, no doubt.

 

This is not true. You have given nothing but Georgism (and, when asked, added neoclassical cobblers). How do you go beyond Georgist tax? Please provide exact detail

 

Hint: kneel in a cesspool and slit your belly in remorse for your despicable behavior. Really, it would be best all round.

 

I think this sums you up!

 

It is most definitely true.

That is a bald fabrication, and one you have repeated many times.

Pigovian taxes are not "cobblers." Why do you always feel you have to make $#!+ up?

<sigh> As I have explained to you many times and you always just ignore and make $#!+ up about, by:
advocating Pigovian taxes;
removing private banksters' privilege of debt money issuance in favor of exclusively public money issuance;
extending a universal individual exemption from location subsidy repayment sufficient to secure access to economic opportunity; and
indemnifying current location owners for the purchase value of their holdings.
Those are the most substantial public revenue measures where I differ from Henry George and Georgists. If you want to extend discussion of my differences with George to non-revenue policies, we can do that. It would give you more things to make $#!+ up about, not that there is any noticeable shortage.

 

Enough of your false, disingenuous and despicable spew. Even though it is your mainstay.

 

Why always make $#!+ up?

Which is why you made it up.

You made that up, too. You are always just makin' $#!+ up. Why do you do that?

Try an actual response.

 

You're a bad Georgist.

Ouch, you pretended Pigovian tax was relevant...

You whined and thought that was enough. Let's have an economic analysis of the Georgists. Then an economic analysis in how you differ. Good luck

 

This is great! Can you refer to a non-Georgist comment?

 

If I were, it would make me infinitely better than you.

Ouch, you pretended it wasn't.

That is a bald fabrication, as all readers can verify for themselves.

You asked, I answered. OF COURSE it was not enough, for YOU.

Be my guest.

Have another drink. You seem to need one.

Back atcha.

 

So you have pro-Georgist comment?

 

much of disease is caused by not being able to grow their own food. 8 hours farming would be more efficient than 8 hours on screen consuming processed illness, while consuming processed food.

with exception to military superiority, research and innovation has brought i fones.

 

tariffs on the welfare paradise of canada to bring back good paying jobs to poor Americans is not evil.

the rich are willing to sacrifice the poor when they don't get what they want, so it is better your country's poor be sacrificed than ours.

 

Wrong. Amazing that you have the worlds greatest resource at your fingertips and don't use it. Property taxes in Florida and California were forcing people to sell their homes because they could not afford the tax. Its happening again in Seattle. Leave the fairy dust behind and do some reading.

 

I'm off-grid, and have been for a long time. We moved to water self-sufficiency about 25 years ago, and power self-sufficiency in the intervening years.

There is far more to the infrastructure-dependent city dweller's footprint than electricity.

 

Okay, then like I said, you can claim to be less costly in terms of that infrastructure than city dwellers.

Though as you point out, there is more to infrastructure than just electricity. That road to your house costs more per user-mile to build and maintain. I’ll assume you have a septic system or similar, which is usually less environmentally safe than city sewer, especially if it isn’t maintained well. And how about phone?

You mention the fact that all goods have to be brought to the city, implying that also increases a city dwellers footprint. But again, unless you never go to the store, nearly everything sold in rural areas has a higher per-capita transportation cost, simply because it’s generally shipped in smaller, less efficient lots, and shipped less frequently, so the roads built to make the shipment possible are used less frequently.

Most manufactured goods are made in cities, for several reasons: that’s where the workers are, that’s where the raw materials are centrally available, and that’s where the infrastructure for the plant is most readily available and cheapest. So if you buy any manufactured goods, you are indirectly benefiting from that city infrastructure, without which that product would be more expensive. Or might not even exist.

Cities have very large infrastructures because they have a lot of people living in a relatively small area. But that lets them get very large economies of scale. So they are almost always more efficient per capita.

 

You are really clutching at straws here. Neither crank or I have AC which is the single biggest use if electricity in your average urban home and I heat with wood cut off my own land. Not sure about crank on that one. We both supply our own water and grow much of our own food. You really need to give up on this.

 

???

I'm not trying to attack either of you, so don't take my posts personally.

I'm just trying to point out that city dwellers, as a general rule, are more efficient per capita than people in rural areas, thanks to smaller distances and economies of scale. That is not a value judgement or a criticism; it's just physics and economics.

You guys may be an exception. Probably are. But I was responding to crank's general criticism of city dwellers and their expensive infrastructure.

I also wanted to make a point about interdependence. You probably have a smaller footprint than the average city dweller, it's also true that part of what makes your lifestyle possible is city dwellers, in the form of manufactured goods and the infrastructure you DO use, such as paved roads, cell towers, phone lines, what have you. If you have a septic system, it was probably built in a factory and shipped to your location.

Very few people are completely "off grid". Almost everyone is dependent on some distant part of the economy for some critical part of their existence.

I'm not trying to claim that either of you claimed to be completely off grid. Just pointing out the fact that almost nobody is, including a large number of people who THINK they are.

 

I think you'd need to modify that position to inner city dwellers and include suburbia with rural dwellers to make your point more valid. In fact I think urban sprawl with suburbia spreading out like a flood is extremely inefficient but people want trees, a yard and places for their kids to run and play so don't expect suburbs to go away anytime soon.