






















|
Seeing the Cat
Neil Gilchrist
[2001]
As it is over twenty years ago that I became a Georgist and because
it was a gradual process I cannot point to a moment when I saw the
cat. It wasn't really that kind of experience. For me it was more like
the cat was just sitting there quietly on the sofa and I gradually got
to know it.
My father first introduced me to Henry George's thinking. If I had
not heard about Henry George from him, like most people I would
probably never have heard of Henry George. Like most people who do
hear about George from Georgists I remained unconvinced. The arguments
were emotive. The economic terms were from another era. However, I
happened to study Public Finance and Economics as part of an M.B.A. I
discovered that what George proposed is supported by economic theory
and empirical results. I learnt that Land Value Taxation met all the
criteria set down by economists for a good tax. It was virtually the
only one that did. It became clear to me just how much harm was done
to the economy by the current tax system. Having come to know the cat
I would spend many hours discussing the mechanisms of applying it and
the benefits that would flow with my father.
Of course when I became a Georgist I wanted to promote the brilliance
of what I had learned. I soon became frustrated as others would simply
reject the rhetoric for being just that. They wanted proof. They
wanted examples where it had worked. They wanted to know how it would
effect them.
I found that I could not simply espouse its virtues. I had to prepare
people by establishing some facts about taxation and getting agreement
on what we want to achieve. I would then talk about a theoretical tax
that was not a burden on production and exchange. I would talk about
the source of land value. Then having prepared the ground I would say
the magic words - Land Value Taxation. Sometimes there would be the
violent reaction of shortsighted self-interest that needed to be
balanced by questions on how much tax the listener pays on rent. As a
result of these experiences my approach to promoting Georgism is some
times a little dry but I find it very effective. It was encouraging to
find that most people would support LVT if only they heard of it the
right way.
I don't expect everyone to use the same approach that I do. However,
I would counsel against getting stuck in nineteenth century
terminology.
The M.B.A I referred to earlier was in Public Sector Administration.
In studying and experiencing policy development as a public servant I
learnt that policy is seldom a reflection of the majority view. The
electoral system simply does not provide a means for the public to
express a view on most issues or change the government on the basis on
any one issue. Politicians will do what they believe is best and what
will not cause the loss of marginal electorates. It can be unpopular
so long as it does not cause voters to change their vote. Bureaucrats,
influenced by special interest groups, are the main developers of
policy. Georgists do not represent a special interest but the common
interest. We do not command the numbers to be a threat in marginal
electorates. We generally do not possess the credibility to obtain a
respectful hearing.
I have witnessed attempts to promote Georgism by education. It is
very labour intensive and there is generally little to show for it. I
say this realising that many Georgists today have come to it through
completing a course. Or were they Georgists already simply enhancing
their knowledge? Our membership does not grow geometrically. There is
no multiplier of each new member bringing in three more. At the rate
of growth of membership we will always represent a diminishing
proportion of the population. I think there are a few causes:
* People simply are not interested in doing courses
anymore. There are more stimulating and more accessible forms of
entertainment.
* The courses are old fashioned.
* People do not join organisations, they join causes. If we were
out there promoting and making a difference people would be excited
by what we are doing and saying. A course and a subscription to a
journal does not motivate. We need to enthuse people and encourage
them to participate. Worse than simply failing to attract them, we
drive them away by fighting amongst ourselves over almost anything.
Some are openly hostile to the efforts of other Georgists as if they
want the success of the movement to rely on them. There needs to be
healthy but tempered discussion. There needs to be enthusiasm for
what one is doing without dismissing what another is doing.
* Courses are aimed at ordinary people, which is laudable but
ordinary people do not develop policy.
I advocate lobbying of policy makers and opinion leaders. This
involves educating politicians that LVT is good policy that will bring
about positive results for which they will get the credit. They will
not lose votes because the attacks of vested interests can be
rebutted. It also involves the lobbying of those special interest
groups that already lobby politicians and bureaucrats. Special
interest groups need to be informed as to why LVT should be of special
interest to them. The employee and employer organisations need to be
given an alternative to taxes on employment that harms both their
interests. Chambers of Commerce and Industry need to be given
alternatives to taxes on production and exchange. Social welfare
groups need to be given an alternative to raising government revenue
that does not tax people out of jobs or raise the cost of living.
These groups are influential and will be more effective at bring about
change than we will ever be directly.
Another example is where we were able to point out that LVT is the
supreme green tax at the 2001 Global Greens Conference in Canberra. In
the Greens we had an audience that had objectives but were aware that
they did not have all the strategies for meeting those objectives.
They are predisposed to challenge the status quo and many have an
understanding of the effect of taxes on consumption decisions.
I am optimistic about our future. We cannot wait for a messiah to
lead us out of the wilderness. We don't need prophets. We need people
who are prepared to work cooperatively to achieving concrete targets
by one of a select number of strategies.
|