It’s arguable Karl Marx is the better-known figure today because he was the lesser threat to capitalism’s excesses.

Henry George, on the other hand: his ideas had to be buried and economics to be recast in order to make no distinction between the returns to land and capital: “They’re both the same. Both have been earned!“

https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2019/04/henry-georges-single-tax-could-combat-inequality/587197/

What a pity an otherwise good article degenerates into “There’s not enough rent!“, an old canard people have seen through, from John Locke many years ago, to Mason Gaffney today.

Locke first noted that all taxation comes out of land rent anyway, so why not put it there in the first instance for the sake of efficiency.

Professor Gaffney notes similarly, having shown that all taxes come out of rent [ATCOR], and that the excess burden [of counter-productive taxes] comes out of rent [EBCOR].

Therefore, “there’s not enough rent!” is no rebuttal Henry George’s insight into what is proving to be today’s great economic calamity, namely, that wages and profits are what’s left after [privatised] rents have been extracted from the economy.

Australia is about to have an election in which both sides are concerned about producing a budget surplus.

That is absolutely ridiculous in a situation where Australia’s massive private debt bubble (brought about by impossibly high mortgages) is in the process of bursting.

It’s the private debt about which we really should be worried – and a surplus budget will add incredible fuel to this deflationary fire!

Forget budget surpluses, guys! It’s time to spend up big – and responsibly!

Stephanie Kelton is not so good on the private debt issue, but she can’t be beaten on why governments should NOT be seeking to balance the budget.