rural idiocy

[Max B. Sawicky]

>
> Yes, also for underutilised rural land. But as usual the banal impulse
> against taxation -- so as to make SA more internationally competitive
> -- has poisoned that debate, and we expect very little progress. The
> Department of Land Affairs, whose minister Derek Hanekom is an
> ex-lefty, was penetrated quite early on by a World Bank advisory
> team, so it's market-oriented policy nearly all the way. Hanekom was
> given the mandate (in the ANC election manifesto) to redistribute 30%
> of arable land and will in fact redistribute less than 1% by all accounts.
>
> This is true rural idiocy.

It's not even good neo-classical economics.
A land tax can't have any disincentive effects
on mobile capital or labor.  Could actually
relieve taxes on those things.  Or it could
finance public services which stimulate
private sector development.  The only reason
to oppose it is if you own land.

It's also a real thing in the U.S., albeit not
in wide use.  Pittsburgh, Pa. and other burgs
in Pennsylvania are experimenting with it.
It's been written about by Wallace Oates and
Robert Schwab in the National Tax Journal.

The idea of such a tax replacing everything
else as a 'single tax,' especially in the U.S.,
is nonsense.  It is a logical device for
local governments, who have the most reason
to be cautious about taxes on mobile capital
or labor.

There is a kind of cult which also promotes
the tax, so one must take care to separate
chaff from wheat in examining the record.

MBS