1. The value of Rembrandts doesn't come from government spending, it comes from Rembrandt, and however indirectly, the current owner of the painting paid him for it.
2. Rembrandts are not something people would otherwise be at liberty to use, so no compensation is owed for stopping others from using them, or for being stopped.
3. Unlike land, Rembrandts are easily destroyed or lost, and do not naturally recover their value when left alone, so reducing their value by taxation could lead to their permanent loss through neglect.
The "service of supplying land" is indisputably fixed, at zero. There is no such thing as a "service of supplying the land," because the supply of land is fixed, and cannot be increased or decreased by the site owner.(b) physical land may be fixed, but the service of supplying the land is not;
There is no such service, never has been, and never will be. The site-owner does nothing whatever but pocket the rent, which he can do just as well while comatose. He is a pure parasite, and contributes no value whatever. This is proved by the fact that removal of the owner and everything he has ever done has no effect whatever on the availability or unimproved value of the land.it is the productive service by the site-owner that generates value, and it will be gravely discouraged by taxes on land values.
That is just a stupid lie that Murray Rothbard told because there is no way to contrive objections to liberty, justice and truth other than by telling stupid lies. He decided to oppose LVT, and therefore decided, at the same moment, to tell stupid lies, and proceeded to tell them. It's always the same. We have seen it here in this thread and in all the other threads where LVT has been discussed: there are no honest objections to LVT, never have been, and never will be, only stupid lies.A 100 percent tax on land values will generate chaos in land and therefore in production generally; a lesser degree of taxes will inflict lesser damage, but damage there most certainly will be.
But never provided any logical or factual basis for that belief.Finally, many Georgists have, by inference, accused me of wishing to levy taxes on production, and have expounded on the beneficial effects that would flow once such taxes were lifted from the
economy. I have great respect for many aspects of Henry George; and none more than for his passages on the benefits that would ensue once taxes were removed from production. Our difference is that I
believe that land value taxation would also blight production,
Again, that is indisputably contrary to fact. Any injustice is associated with the transition, and is easily handled by appropriate temporary measures.and, further, be unjust rather than the contrary.
No other method is possible, has ever been possible, or ever will be possible.If we wish to establish justice and remove taxes from production, some other means than
land value taxation will have to be found." Rothbard
Exactly how I pictured you....