patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,193,317 comments by 13,877 users - komputodo, Stout online now
Is Geolibertarianism the answer to Feminized Socialism?
invite response
2019 Apr 19, 6:55pm 3,895 views 28 comments
« First « Previous Comments 22 - 28 of 28 Search these comments
22
stereotomy
2022 Aug 1, 4:46pm
stereotomy
2022 Aug 1, 4:46pm
just_passing_through says
This - good landlords look for responsible stewards of their property. It's a give and take. If the tenant maintains or materially increases the value of the property, then the tenant should be rewarded.
I've been a tenant for poor and rich landlords. Poor landlords are the worst - it's all about the $$. Better-off landlords are more concerned with property stewardship. If you're a renter, but you have skills, and can make the landlord's job as easy as possilble, you need to be rewarded - i.e., don't raise the rent.
Full disclosure - I'm renting.
I'll tell you what if I get hit with taxes on my rental properties I will be passing that along to renters. Mine are in Texas and I treat them well. For instance I have a tenant that has taken good care of the yard. He's one of those contract mercenaries the government uses in Afghanistan. He may lose his job as he just failed to qualify running some distance in some time - I forget. He get's one more chance.
They've been there 3 years and I've never raised the rent. I don't get much out of Texas houses but they're new. Just paying down the mortgage. Just last week I spent nearly 1K power washing the concrete areas and repainting the deck. I'm about to ask them if they want another 1-year lease at the same rate.
All of this changes if I get hit with higher taxes.
Anyone who thinks landlords are unproductive and make money passively has never been a landlord or tried to be a good / fair one.
Besides. I don...
This - good landlords look for responsible stewards of their property. It's a give and take. If the tenant maintains or materially increases the value of the property, then the tenant should be rewarded.
I've been a tenant for poor and rich landlords. Poor landlords are the worst - it's all about the $$. Better-off landlords are more concerned with property stewardship. If you're a renter, but you have skills, and can make the landlord's job as easy as possilble, you need to be rewarded - i.e., don't raise the rent.
Full disclosure - I'm renting.
24
Patrick
2022 Aug 1, 6:34pm
Patrick
2022 Aug 1, 6:34pm
stereotomy says
I think the most common case by far is that if the tenant increases the value of the property, the tenant is thoroughly punished with higher rent.
And this is central to Henry George's argument that work is disincentivized by the fact that landlords can effectively steal the result of that work, and in fact can steal wages from whatever labor is going on in the area. This makes the whole society poorer.
Corruption does the same thing. In many countries, if you bother to create anything of value, the ruling mafia family will simply take it from you. So no one even bothers.
People need to feel secure that they can reap the results of their own labor before they will work hard. Landlords create insecurity for labor.
I used to think it politically impossible to implement Georgism, but on reflection, there are probably a lot of rich people who would prefer a high land value tax with zero income tax to a low land value tax but a high income tax. Maybe they could be recruited to the cause.
More advantages of Georgism (aka Geoism):
- land cannot be hidden, so there is less opportunity for evasion
- land tax records are usually public, so you can see how much each bit of land is paying
- the blessed relief of never having to file an income tax return
- the blessed relief of not having to constantly add on sales tax, or for any business to collect it
If the tenant maintains or materially increases the value of the property, then the tenant should be rewarded.
I think the most common case by far is that if the tenant increases the value of the property, the tenant is thoroughly punished with higher rent.
And this is central to Henry George's argument that work is disincentivized by the fact that landlords can effectively steal the result of that work, and in fact can steal wages from whatever labor is going on in the area. This makes the whole society poorer.
Corruption does the same thing. In many countries, if you bother to create anything of value, the ruling mafia family will simply take it from you. So no one even bothers.
People need to feel secure that they can reap the results of their own labor before they will work hard. Landlords create insecurity for labor.
I used to think it politically impossible to implement Georgism, but on reflection, there are probably a lot of rich people who would prefer a high land value tax with zero income tax to a low land value tax but a high income tax. Maybe they could be recruited to the cause.
More advantages of Georgism (aka Geoism):
- land cannot be hidden, so there is less opportunity for evasion
- land tax records are usually public, so you can see how much each bit of land is paying
- the blessed relief of never having to file an income tax return
- the blessed relief of not having to constantly add on sales tax, or for any business to collect it
25
stereotomy
2022 Aug 1, 7:14pm
stereotomy
2022 Aug 1, 7:14pm
Ceffer says
Patrick says
@Patrick - points taken. I just happen to live in a less desirable area of the country that has a history of mom & pop rentals.
Maybe I've been lucky in that I didn't happen to rent from money-grubbing psycho landlords. They just wanted me to maintain their property, until the mythical progeny would return to be near and dear to the family homestead.
Then again, I'm pretty direct. Scammers think I'm an asshole, while based people know I understand what's real.
stereotomy says
Full disclosure - I'm renting.
How dare you !
Patrick says
stereotomy says
If the tenant maintains or materially increases the value of the property, then the tenant should be rewarded.
I think the most common case by far is that if the tenant increases the value of the property, the tenant is thoroughly punished with higher rent.
And this is central to Henry George's argument that work is disincentivized by the fact that landlords can effectively steal the result of that work, and in fact can steal wages from whatever labor is going on in the area. This makes the whole society poorer.
Corruption does the same thing. In many countries, if you bother to create anything of value, the ruling mafia family will simply take it from you. So no one even bothers.
People need to feel secure that they can reap the results of their own labor before they will work hard. Landlords create insecurity for labor.
I us...
@Patrick - points taken. I just happen to live in a less desirable area of the country that has a history of mom & pop rentals.
Maybe I've been lucky in that I didn't happen to rent from money-grubbing psycho landlords. They just wanted me to maintain their property, until the mythical progeny would return to be near and dear to the family homestead.
Then again, I'm pretty direct. Scammers think I'm an asshole, while based people know I understand what's real.
26
just_passing_through
2022 Aug 5, 7:11pm
just_passing_through
2022 Aug 5, 7:11pm
stereotomy says
I'm renting too. I'm also going to rent when I move back to Texas in ~6 weeks. I DO take care of my properties, they are nothing like what you get in CA. That tax increase this year though whew! I passed it along to the tenants. One house is a couple and they sort of freaked out about it. Theirs was only $100 the rest were more.
I let them think over the new lease for a week fully expecting them to leave - because they can't afford it but they didn't. They really should get an apartment or a much cheaper house. Next year I'll likely be raising again, then what?
Not my fault if people are morons. They had it good for 4 years with no increases and are surprised when they finally get one. (They got a small one last year but very small)
This - good landlords look for responsible stewards of their property. It's a give and take. If the tenant maintains or materially increases the value of the property, then the tenant should be rewarded.
I've been a tenant for poor and rich landlords. Poor landlords are the worst - it's all about the $$. Better-off landlords are more concerned with property stewardship. If you're a renter, but you have skills, and can make the landlord's job as easy as possilble, you need to be rewarded - i.e., don't raise the rent.
Full disclosure - I'm renting.
I'm renting too. I'm also going to rent when I move back to Texas in ~6 weeks. I DO take care of my properties, they are nothing like what you get in CA. That tax increase this year though whew! I passed it along to the tenants. One house is a couple and they sort of freaked out about it. Theirs was only $100 the rest were more.
I let them think over the new lease for a week fully expecting them to leave - because they can't afford it but they didn't. They really should get an apartment or a much cheaper house. Next year I'll likely be raising again, then what?
Not my fault if people are morons. They had it good for 4 years with no increases and are surprised when they finally get one. (They got a small one last year but very small)
27
just_passing_through
2022 Aug 5, 7:13pm
just_passing_through
2022 Aug 5, 7:13pm
Also word to the wise if you're a landlord: Force a new lease every year instead of letting things go month to month. That way you're either renewing or re-leasing during the season when people are looking to move. If someone decided to move out of a month to month in early December you're screwed. So I force a new lease this time of year every time.
The only time I let it go month to month is if my initial lease was off season.
Commit or GTFO!
The only time I let it go month to month is if my initial lease was off season.
Commit or GTFO!
28
just_passing_through
2022 Aug 6, 10:29am
just_passing_through
2022 Aug 6, 10:29am
HunterTits says
1. LTV is not the same as property tax.
No shit Sherlock
2. Their is a natural limit you can raise your rent to before your tenants move out.
No shit but people have to live somewhere
While MGTOW is great, how can the political side of this problem be addressed? Libertarianism is basically the answer since government spending and taxation needs to be reduced. However, what is the correct size of government? Libertarians will talk about small government, but just how small would government end up if Libertarians controlled the government? Republicans also talk about small government, yet anytime Republicans have had control of all three branches of the federal government, they have failed to reduce the size of government. Republicans also routinely abandon their principles to white knight for women. There is no reason to assume that Libertarianism won’t fall victim to the same thing, especially when it comes to white knighting for women.
How do we get around this problem? We need a political system that has a specific principle of never taxing (male) productivity. It turns out that such a thing has been devised, and it is called Geolibertarianism. What Geolibertarianism does is combine libertarianism with Geoism or Georgism. The name, Georgism, comes from the fact that the geoist side of this was popularized by the economist Henry George. George and earlier economists, including Adam Smith and David Ricardo, (in addition to Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine) were advocates of a land value tax. Even Milton Friedman called the land value tax the least bad tax. The land value tax is a tax on land and land only. It does not tax anything built on that land or done on that land. It can not tax production or any form of productivity by design. Because of this, advocates of the land value tax advocate it a single tax where there are no other taxes.
With only land (and anything else that meets the economic definition of land like natural resources and the electromagnetic spectrum) getting taxed in this system, it puts a ceiling on government spending. Thus it forces the end of government redistribution from men to women. It also adds a barrier to implementing additional taxes since any tax on anything that isn’t land is verboten by design. Geolibertarianism won’t stop politicians from trying to tax (male) productivity, but in a Geolibertarian system any attempt to do that is immediately suspect so there will be a built in backlash whenever a politician tries to tax productivity. It is telling that socialists and other leftists hate Geolibertarianism (and Georgism more broadly). Karl Marx hated it, and a likely reason is that it repudiates his ideas by showing that labor and capital are not the separate things he said they are. Paul Krugman admitted that the land value tax was efficient but that it could not be used to fund a welfare state. While Barack Obama has not commented on this, it is a stake in the heart of his, “You didn’t build that” because Geolibertarianism identifies the only things a man didn’t build.
http://www.antifeministtech.info/how-geolibertarianism-can-stop-redistribution-from-men-to-women/
@Patrick
Just happened to come across this looking for pro-male companies. Unsurprisingly, I had to use Duckduckgo as Google gave nothing but Guardian, Jezebel, Cosmo, etc. articles celebrating the end of "Toxic Masculinity"