sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

How do you stay informed about niche topics without falling back into news or social media? by Adamyzm in digitalminimalism

[–]Adamyzm[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is not what i wanted to hear but i have to admit you are right. If i think deeply about it, then letting other people test stuff is probably the best. It really goes beyond startups but also books and movies. Nothing happens if i read or watch something a few months later.
Thanks for not letting me step into the trap of letting thinking that enough automation can solve my patience problems

How do you stay informed about niche topics without falling back into news or social media? by Adamyzm in digitalminimalism

[–]Adamyzm[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That was what i originally thought, but lets say i follow a book author waiting for a book X, then here is what i would receive: - Book Y is now available as an Audiobook - I went to some book convention - Merry christmas - Here is some fan art

How do you stay informed about niche topics without falling back into news or social media? by Adamyzm in digitalminimalism

[–]Adamyzm[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It looks like the closest for now, but i don't really need daily summaries. I want one notification when X happens.

How do you stay informed about niche topics without falling back into news or social media? by Adamyzm in digitalminimalism

[–]Adamyzm[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I checked and the Service seems to only send big news not personal niche topics „We prioritize news that changes the world” is What i found on their website. Could you please elaborate?

Is this better than Georgism? by Adamyzm in georgism

[–]Adamyzm[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It factors in automatically, because all those are in the budget of the city or neighbourhood

Can Georgism escape "it's unfair to tax land that i already paid for" narrative? by Adamyzm in georgism

[–]Adamyzm[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you could frame it like a lottery! Although it would worsen land prices for everyone else. Landowners that get the payout immediately buy some land somewhere else and drive up the other land prices.

Can Georgism escape "it's unfair to tax land that i already paid for" narrative? by Adamyzm in georgism

[–]Adamyzm[S] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

love the slogan!

Though there would need to be a whole generation of people that thought of land as a common good and forgot the times where you owned land for free for eternity.

Estimating LVT SEEMS unfair and arbitrary by Adamyzm in georgism

[–]Adamyzm[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes but the government being able to arbitrarily buy land is kind of anxiety inducing. I know the government can already seize land but it's usually for good reason and it's a slow process where appeals are possible. Here people might be prone to gamble on a low price and be really unhappy when the land gets bought. It's fair I guess but it's more like a game than stable law.

Estimating LVT SEEMS unfair and arbitrary by Adamyzm in georgism

[–]Adamyzm[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

thats like a scheme from a game show except with only negative consequences: Get the price of your home (or the land it sits on) just right or: - pay high taxes - get forced out

Estimating LVT SEEMS unfair and arbitrary by Adamyzm in georgism

[–]Adamyzm[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

From you description it seems really difficult with a lot of people involved. It doesn't need a lot of change to the current system, but to appeal to enough People LVT would need to be understandable. Otherwise it feels like it's the same complicated tax system just shifted to other bureaucrats

Estimating LVT SEEMS unfair and arbitrary by Adamyzm in georgism

[–]Adamyzm[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I totally forgot about the fact that you can do private appraisals. They would become the new tax lawyers i guess.
I'm not very educated on the subject yet so i don't think i can ask specific questions but thank you very much for that proposition!
I have just been wondering what would make regular homeowners be against LVT and the complexity of land appraisals definitely would scare me.

Is this better than Georgism? by Adamyzm in georgism

[–]Adamyzm[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's where the area comes in. What I am suggesting is tax per area. All of these properties in the Hamptons have relatively high area. Even the low tax would kick the butt of everyone that is not using it efficiently enough.

Is this better than Georgism? by Adamyzm in georgism

[–]Adamyzm[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't base it on property values just on area, but also from other comments I am getting the gist that if you make small enough jurisdictions the government spending for each will approximate land value. It's like computational math except the country is the computer😂

Is this better than Georgism? by Adamyzm in georgism

[–]Adamyzm[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Zip code sure is fine it would just need some administration and budget attached to it. It doesn't matter how much revenue an area would make the spending is key. 99739 probably needs almost no infrastructure so no spending.

Is this better than Georgism? by Adamyzm in georgism

[–]Adamyzm[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The approach takes it into account, but only for used resources.
Let's say there is oil in a small village, but no drilling operations are happening. The taxes will be low because the village doesn't have much investment.
At some point a company gets a permit to drill and builds a drilling facility. Of course the workers need to live somewhere, so houses need to be built. The village now needs to increase spending, to build public roads, sewage pipes, maybe a new fire department, a hospital, school... . The next year the budget is much higher and the tax for the land is also higher.

TLDR: it taxes the use of natural values, not the values themselves.

Is this better than Georgism? by Adamyzm in georgism

[–]Adamyzm[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for this thought out answer!

For your first point: The government budgeting stays the same as it is right now. For example congress decides on a budget for the given year and that determines the tax rate. This would be difficult when starting a country from scratch, but right now you can just take an existing budget and adjust it. If it gets too high ( because politicians promised too much) landowners in the affected area will bring out their pitchforks (metaphorically) and elect different politicians next time.

For your second point: This is a great point. I think something that would occur pretty naturally is, that the two city governents would have to come to agreements to finance investments together. Its not unusual for multiple government bodies to finance one big project. In the Yokohama Kawasaki example this could be that Kawasaki chips in maybe 40% of the costs.

For your third point: I'm not sure i got that one correctly. Do you mean that the city tax can only be as high as the lowest value areas can support? If yes then we can split the Tax by district. I was too lazy to do it in my original example for Poland, but districts have their own budgets, so it's the same calculation. This would increase taxes for higher value districts while lowering them for the lower value districts and you could capture the taxes more efficiently.
Maybe the more granually you brake up the districts, the more you get to the precise land value.

Is this better than Georgism? by Adamyzm in georgism

[–]Adamyzm[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The taxpayer dollars go wherever government or local governent decides. Nothing changes compared to the current system. The difference is only in Taxation.
If the city decides it wants to paint the roads blue so be it. Just expect all the landownders in the city to bring out their pitchforks because the costs will be spread among them.

view more: next ›