The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
That may be the case for Hong Kong, but their system is defective in many ways: it just happens to monetise (indirectly via the government as intermediary) far more land value than virtually anyone else.
Which I think is a Good Thing tax-wise.
What I am proposing is essentially a loan direct to the land, not to the owner.
The difference is that in this loan, no money is paid for the use of money, but rather, money is being paid for the use of the capital invested in a particular location, both publicly and privately.
I can demonstrate conclusively that - as should be intuitively obvious - a funding cost that does not include compound interest is lower than one which does.
Also, I think that a currency redeemable in payment for such a rental payment would be generally fungible in a location.
"The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed"
Who said anything about the custodian being the sovereign?
Managing the monetary system is a sovereign function, because the sovereign is the only economic actor within its jurisdiction that is solvent by fiat rather than balance sheet.
Making a monetary system without a sovereign that's actually sovereign is - eh - not wise, as the EU has been quite instructively demonstrating for the next best thing to three years now.
Austerity can only be implemented in the shadow of a concentration camp.
by afew - Oct 31 25 comments
by gmoke - Oct 28 11 comments
by ManfromMiddletown - Oct 20 61 comments
by Democrats Ramshield - Oct 31 1 comment
by gmoke - Oct 7 3 comments
by afew - Oct 3125 comments
by Democrats Ramshield - Oct 311 comment
by gmoke - Oct 2811 comments
by ManfromMiddletown - Oct 2061 comments
by gmoke - Oct 73 comments
by ARGeezer - Oct 760 comments
by DoDo - Oct 310 comments