- I've spent the last five years dutifully responding to each and every criticism I've found online. My entire original article series was about responding to the three most significant critiques of the movement. On my blog you can find many other such replies to critiques that have come in since then.

- This is important to do for epistemic reasons. However, it has nothing to do with actually changing things. You simply do not change the world by responding to your most hard-bitten critics. That's an entirely orthogonal problem.

You never know until you try.

Alternatively, reclaimed land is usually a state initiated enterprise in most cases. In those situations, the land can simply be leased out by the state. This is literally what NYC did with Battery Park city!

https://blog.landeconomics.org/p/georgism-through-land-leasi...

Henry George was obviously a Single Taxer, but "Georgism" has a generally broader meaning than that. Some Georgists are single taxers, but not all, including Greg and I.

When we talk to elected officials, we don't even talk about Henry George all that much (I did in the ACX article series because it all started with the progress and poverty book review). We mostly speak of "Land value return" and our focus is mostly on pragmatic revenue neutral tax shifts to LVT.

Correct.

The article includes a section on land valuation that gets into those details.

https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/does-georgism-work-five-yea...

Most research asserts that a land value tax decreases the selling price of land.

Taxes can be passed on when the tax induces a change in supply. Conventional property taxes are partially passed through because the component of the tax that falls on the building. Tax buildings, get less buildings.

Taxes on land do not affect the supply of the land, this implies they are not passed on and the research literature largely agrees with this.

https://blog.landeconomics.org/p/book-review-the-natural-div...