• J Lou@mastodon.socialOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Why is it not agreeable for any group to use land for purposes that is beneficial to the members of the group? I don’t see how you could have workplace democracy without this. Of course, the workers in an enterprise are going to use their democratic control rights to make decisions that benefit them.

    Sure, there has to be some sort of urban planning and regulations on land use. That is perfectly compatible with Georgism

    • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Urban planning and land allocation are required for resolving which group may use which land, and which usage is permitted.

      Otherwise, conflict would be intractable, and exchange and transportation would be dysfunctional.

      If land is managed cooperatively, then once a group is allocated use of land, it may proceed with use, but the public still holds an interest in broader supervision, and in cases of revised planning or observed mismanagement, reallocation may be warranted.

      • J Lou@mastodon.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Land value taxation actually solves the mismanagement problem because as the location site-value increases the workers using the land have to pay more. This gives them an economic incentive to use the land more productively in order to afford the higher land rent @leftism

        • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The public interest in managing land is not limited to assessing how much revenue is generated from its use, nor necessarily strongly bound to such considerations.