RE: OWNERSHIP: Moral principles and Binary Theory of Property

[John Médaille <john@medaille.com>]

At 09:50 PM 6/29/2005 -0400, Ed Dodson wrote:
>Ed Dodson responding...
>Adavans wrote:
>
>John, I suspect that if what you say is true, a Georgist bridge could be 
>built between BE and Social Credit. It would be interesting to see what Ed 
>Dodson has to say about such a bridge.
>
>Ed here:
>I spend much of my professional career working to promote public/private 
>partnerships, put together below-market rate financing packages for 
>community development initiatives and affordable housing developments. 
>What this taught me is that we need to use a wide range of tools to meet 
>specific societal objectives. It is clear to me that different 
>circumstances warrant different approaches. I do feel strongly, however, 
>that the work of economists will only become valuable to the process if 
>they return to use of land as a factor of production with very distinct 
>characteristics from labor and capital goods and credit markets.

Amen. Which is why I point out the current two-factor neo-classical and 
binary theories are simply incomplete. Further, once they recognize land as 
a third factor (as obviously it is--even in the infinite domain of 
cyberspace one needs a place to put the server) they will be forced to 
recognize the law of rents, which will only leave them a choice of Karl 
Marx or Henry George.


John C. Médaille
www.medaille.com/distributivism.htm

Amor ipse notitia est.

To subscribe to this or another of COG's discussion groups register at:
http://cog.kent.edu/register.html
To unsubscribe from this group send a message to majordomo@cog.kent.edu
with a single line in the body of the message that says:
unsubscribe ownership