Why is it so difficult to sell the ‘single tax’?

Economic performance is halved by current taxes carrying deadweight losses of more than twice the taxes levied into the economy, so wouldn’t a charge against land values (having no deadweight at all) be far more practical?

As the uber-wealthy own not only more land but the most valuable land, wouldn’t such a charge on land values be more equitable than taxing wages which applies a lid on effective demand and inflates land prices?

As ‘land’ (including spectra, etc., in the economics sense) is currently grossly undertaxed, this has channelled natural resource rents (created by the community) mainly to the 0.1%. As a result, the poor and middle class have suffered badly and are overly-indebted.

Labour parties in the UK and Australia were founded based on a land ‘tax’ replacing all other taxes, but they and unions have backslid on the idea as the number of rent-seeking wannabes has grown.

Has capitalism failed, or is this no longer capitalism? Is it not Rentierism? We seem to have become slaves to banking and the 0.1%, the former of which was actually meant to serve us?

There’s only one thing needs to be socialised in order to put banking and the 0.1% back in their rightful place, but they have the money and control the political hegemony. I guess that’s why it’s so difficult to put into practice the economic truths of Adam Smith, David Ricardo, JS Mill, Tom Paine, Henry George, Mason Gaffney, Joseph Stiglitz, Michael Hudson?

But this sorry state of world economies is unsustainable and must implode.

Let’s hope we then find the wit to rediscover the socio-economic eternities. What’s not to understand about these boom-busts facts on the Australian economy?