SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (Pat Gunning)
Date:
Wed May 31 09:48:09 2006
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (35 lines)
Dear James:  
  
I agree fully with your assessment of the Georgists'  
motivations. I said pretty much the same thing in my  
initial post.  
  
But I don't see the point in responding directly to  
the question about what kind of tax would be best. I  
have already given the broad answer that the best kind  
of tax is one that taxes consumer surplus. But to  
respond in the way that I think you want, I would have  
to say something about sales taxes, income taxes, or  
the like. All taxes, including these, affect  
entrepreneurship, as I have said -- and as everyone  
but the Georgists seem to know. But the issue in the  
discussion is not about this. The issue, in its  
initial form or in Larry's disguise, is about whether  
the land value tax or land rental tax affects  
entrepreneurship.  
  
There is another related issue that I have been  
avoiding, however. It is the claim implicit in Larry's  
post relating to taxing on the basis of elasticities  
of supply. To deal with this would take me very deeply  
into Davenport's competitive entrepreneurship approach  
to price and value, which differs categorically from  
the Marshallian approach that we all have imprinted on  
our brains. It is enough at the moment to present  
Davenport's criticism of George. But perhaps you have  
not been paying close attention to this.  
  
Best wishes,  
  
Pat Gunning  

ATOM RSS1 RSS2