From solid sustainability concepts (i.e., simple, workable) to
actualization. . . in a democracy. This strategic concern is one of our main
preoccupations here at The Commons. I like the way that John
Havercroft has put this to the Land Café here. And your comments and
contributions are as always solicited.

Eric Britton



-----Original Message-----
From: John Havercroft [mailto:john.havercroft@...]
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 12:44 PM
Subject: RE: [LandCafe] Carbon Quotas


All,


I originally came into the LVT Café with an interest in tax policy and the
implications for financing the state from a robust tax base when an
increasingly large proportion of trade and economic activity is either going
“offshore” or dematerialising into the ether via the web and other
electronic means.



It seems to me that the actual fundamental basis of the State is geographic;
that is it consists of an area of land and the people based on it who have a
fundamental interest in how it is managed. The state can only pay for its
activities by collecting some part of the rent (in its proper sense)
accruing from the capital built up by the citizens and the state throughout
their history. This value is neatly reflected in Land Values which,
therefore, will make an excellent tax base for the collection of this rent.



It also seems to me that a significant proportion of our current ability to
consume comes at a high cost in the depletion of the natural resources of
our planet, which we feel free to exploit without care for either our heirs
or our fellow travellers on our planet. Better thinkers than I have
struggled to design institutions to encapsulate a consensus that this
profligacy is wrong but I am sure that taxing consumption must for part of
the solution.



A while ago we at EAST (Environmental And Sustainable Technology) (
www.east-journal.co.uk <http://www.east-journal.co.uk/> ) in conjunction
with Don Ridley proposed an outline scheme for measuring the Natural
Resource content of artefacts. Basically all artefacts are built up from
two ingredients. Raw Material and Human Effort ( work and ingenuity).
Except were prices are maintained by cartel raw material cost is made up of
the cost of extraction and transportation; both of which break down into
(mainly) fossil energy and human effort. This gave us a basic unit of
measurement for raw material; a commodity which is almost universally
available, and which in some parts can be picked from the ground with no
effort; coal – or natural occurring carbon – which, as anthracite, is
available in almost pure form.



So a rational tax system would be based on these two items; the use of land
and the consumption of carbon; measured in a cascade (VAT style) tax though
the manufacturing and distribution process until its final consumption. As
a refinement to the process, post consumption artefacts (or waste products
as we commonly know them!) would be declared a carbon (tax) free natural
resource, changing the balance of costs compared with newly extracted
materials.



These proposals have the merit of being simple, relatively easy to
administer and would provide an adequate tax base for a sensible State.



The only problem is getting from where we are – How do we do this in a
democracy?



JH







-----Original Message-----
From: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:LandCafe@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
Mark Porthouse
Sent: 09 August 2005 10:01
To: Land Café
Subject: Re: [LandCafe] Carbon Quotas



Hi Andrew,

Interesting reading. My instinct is to say that it won't do all that LVT
does. For example there is one use of land that doesn't take energy and
that is hoarding it as an investment. I guess that sums up my biggest
fear, that whilst you may have more equality in terms of access to
nature's energy supply this may not directly translate into equality of
access to other aspects of nature - such as land, clean air, water etc.

Is there any other material about unitax?

Cheers,

Mark

ADuffield1@... wrote:
> Mark et al
>
> The idea of taxing energy (and not just carbon based) at primary source
has
> been best expounded, IMO, by Farel Bradbury, founder of the UK based
Resource
> Use Institute. An outline of his thinking - and his "Unitax"
> (Unit-of-energy-Tax) proposal can be found at: <A
HREF="http://www.rui.co.uk/obvious/">
> http://www.rui.co.uk/obvious/</A>
>
> As I recall, Bradbury proposes this as a single tax solution (a la
George),
> although others - James Robertson for example - have seen it as a key
> ingredient of a wider menu fiscal reforms, including LVT and CI. (I would
add Monetary
> Reform as another).
>
> Unitax has the advantage of giving money an intrinsic value - the Joule -
and
> Bradbury has even thought through the import/export difficulties to which
you
> refer.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Andrew Duffield



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]