RE: Beyond the Capitalism/Socialism Dichotomy
I cannot condone more theft to fix the problem of theft.
land value tax and UBI are two very bad forms of theft.
They sound good only from a point of view of someone trapped in a crony-capitalistic/socialistic system.
They do not fix the problem, they make it worse.
Factories of the future will become so ubiquitous that anyone with rudimentary engineering skills can own the means of production. And then we can start to have true free markets.
With crypto-currencies we can start to have real money.
And with the internet we can approach having perfect information for the buyer.
With these three we can start to see is what is referred to as real capitalism. However, at that point, the capital accumulation will not be so necessary to make factories, so... it really shouldn't be called capitalism.
Land value tax (LVT) and universal basic income (UBI or citizen's dividend) is not theft. Land and natural resources, by nature, belong to everyone equally. Private property is a natural institution only with regard to things we produce with our own labor. I made a spear and a makeshift shovel, those tools are naturally my property (or, more accurately, rightful possessions) because I produced them through my own labor. Man did not produce the land. The institution of private property in land and other natural resources (oil, water, mines, etc.) is an artificial institution created by society. It is a necessary institution, somewhat, but not a natural or entirely just one. When an oil company monopolizes a valuable piece of land and its natural resources, resources that they did not produce, they ought to have to pay a land value tax (or ground-rent in Thomas Paine's words) in order to compensate all the people they are excluding from access to those natural "God-given" resources. This is why LVT and UBI go together, because that tax doesn't belong to the State at all, it goes directly to the people as a compensation for being deprived of access to something that naturally belongs to everyone.
Think of land value tax and citizens dividend (UBI) this way: all citizens are part-owners of the resources of the nation. In all probability, you wouldn't pay any land value tax at all. If you just own a modest home, you pay a little in land value tax, but you receive a dividend (basic income) for your share in ownership of all the other land. Your little piece of land that you pay everyone else for is so small in comparison to the rest of land that they pay you for, so your dividend or basic income cancels out the taxes and leaves you with a surplus. The only people who would pay more than they receive in basic income is people who have own much more land (in terms of value, not necessarily physical size) than is their fair share. If you own a gold mine, then you will pay more than you receive in basic income. However, in exchange for that tax, you get the right to monopolize a freaking gold mine! You still benefit far more than you are forced to contribute, but you are asked to give a little bit back in order to compensate the people you exclude and to ensure that no one else is left impoverished while you live in luxury. Land value tax and basic income makes society much better for everyone.
taxation is theft.
Not saying that some forms of taxation are the lesser of two evils.
I do not agree with your idea of limited resources. (but that is entire post in itself)
And, what you are proposing here just increases the price of goods.
If you had a 100% efficient taxing system then, the oil company would pay everyone 10¢ and everyone would pay an extra 10¢ for gasoline (or other oil based products)
Only when you make the tax system biased does anyone get money out of it. Alaska oil companies pay Alaskans, and everyone in the world pays a little extra for alaska oil. And 50% (or more) of the extra price is used up in administration of this money redistribution (US to Alaskans) scheme.
Companies do not pay taxes. They collect taxes from their customers, for the govern-cement.
A tax on property isn't theft when property is theft. The Earth belongs to everyone. Hoarding a part of it exclusively for yourself is theft, because you didn't produce the Earth. You are only entitled to the product of your own labor, not to natural wealth. Private property in land is theft. Land value tax is not theft, but merely a way of making private property in land acceptable. I.e. Land value tax makes private property not theft. If you oppose land value tax because it's "theft," then you logically also need to oppose private property in land altogether, because that's also theft.
https://steemit.com/anarchism/@ekklesiagora/property-as-theft-the-libertarian-socialist-critique-of-property-part-1
Also, beyond private property entailing theft now, the institution was historically rooted in theft in other ways too:
https://steemit.com/anarchism/@ekklesiagora/property-as-theft-the-libertarian-socialist-critique-of-property-part-2
Taxation IS theft.
Hoarding part of earth for yourself may be theft, but you have to tie some very interesting knots to show it so.
In your critiques you go pretty deep in some areas, and very shallow in others. You rarely got to the actual core of the problems.
i.e. A corporation externalizes costs while internalizing profits only happens because of the state. The state is the problem. Or the corporation as the state is even more of a problem.
Land ownership is a necessity for farming and manufacturing.
There is enough land for everyone.
So, the only case is who gets the most desired land for their use?
And in the near future, the desired land is about to be flipped on its head.
(even worse than that land in Hawaii that was very expensive last year is now a lava flow today)
Would love to see some better ideas on land ownership
https://steemit.com/taxes/@builderofcastles/property-tax-is-the-most-evil-tax-of-our-time
You should check out "Progress and Poverty" by Henry George, which makes the case for land value tax. Adam Smith, Milton Friedman, William F. Buckley, George Bernard Shaw, and Michael Hudson, theorists and experts from both sides, have advocated LVT. Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine, the American Founding Fathers supported the idea, and the original U. S. Constitution (Articles of Confederation) would have made land value tax the only tax (no income tax, no tariffs, no corporate tax).
You can even get a free copy of "Progress and Poverty" here: http://schalkenbach.org/freebook/
Property is not theft.
I mix my labor with the land, build my house, make my garden, make goods. Even animals claim their territory.
Try sleeping in the cave of a bear :)
How is living life freely theft?
Taxation on the other hand is theft.
What is theft, if not the coercive transaction of property?
But I want to extend a hand to you libertarian socialist ( even though that term always makes me think of a vegan butchers):
Unused land, in my view, can be claimed by someone actually using it.
This is a difficult problem, no doubt, but it can be solved.
Taxation and other violent redistribution, on the other hand, can never be turned into something good.
If the tree is rotten, so will be the fruit.
Without universal ethics there will be totalitarianism.
That sort of property is just usufruct. That's not what libertarian socialists oppose. I am not a libertarian socialist. Libertarian socialism is an anarchist school of thought. I am a Georgist, social democrat, and neo-republican. What libertarian socialists oppose is the artificial sort of property known as fee-simple or allodial property, upon which modern capitalism is based. Personally, my position (Georgism) upholds fee-simple but uses tax policy to mitigate the negative consequences.
Check out my series on libertarian socialism (I used to identify with anarchism/libertarian socialism, but I do not anymore, but their critique of property is still valid):
https://steemit.com/anarchism/@ekklesiagora/property-as-theft-the-libertarian-socialist-critique-of-property-summary-anthology