Is land tax compatible with non- violence?

[Steve Gwynne]

That still does not answer the question of how we reconcile the need for respect on one hand and the fact that we commit acts of violence towards other life-forms in order to survive. Collecting a land tax or acquiring land may still be an act of violence if it means evicting other life-forms from both their home and food source. Therefore how is a land tax or the 'peaceful' acquisition of land for human purposes respectful in this instance?

Steve

Mark Barrett wrote: 
> Thought some might be interested. These postings led out of a conversation about use of violence / non-violence in our struggle. 
>  ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Steve asks "How do we do it?" We start by recognising the value of life and show respect for our planet and the universe on which all life depends. 
>  Imho This does not mean we abolish trade. It does not mean that we stop inventing. However in producing wealth we need to respect nature and the natural laws. Men and women attempt to satisfy our needs with the least exertion. 
>  We create wealth - man-made wealth  with our Labour (mental and physical). We soon learnt that to increase our productivity we needed to create tools (that part of man-made wealth we call "Capital"). 
>  Without nature (land and natural resources) we could not create any wealth - we couldn't even survive. If I make a tool, say a hammer, do I have the right to trade it with you? So if the answer is yes then the trading of goods and services and indeed capital creates no harm as long as I have not exploited others and you are free to trade for a fair exchange. 
> However, if you want to make a tool for yourself, do I have the right to charge you for what nature provides? The land on which you need to build your workshop? (The workshop itself is man-made capital). The natural resources in the ground? 
> (If you require timber. I should not charge you for the sustainable tree that grows naturally, although I can rightly seek recompense for the cost of cutting the tree, slicing it into planks and transporting it). 
> However, nature has a value. If I enclose land and call it mine, and you respect my claim, I can live comfortably by charging you or others for that which I have not created. However, even if we have no private ownership of land wealth - land itself has a value. Traders would rather have a shop in Oxford Street than in a country market town. The site (NOT the shop building itself) has a higher value in London. 
>  This value should be collected by the Community to pay for community services. This value is called economic rent. If we want to collect it we can. A simple way to introduce it without a revolution would be to introduce a Location Benefit Levy or Annual Land Value Tax. 
> Whereby all land is valued and a proportion of the economic rent is collected to pay for public services. 
>  Best wishes, Dave Dave Wetzel FRSA FCILT Consultant - "Transforming Communities" Environmental Transport Policies * Affordable Housing * Sustainable Public Finance * Economic Land Reform Programmes 40 Adelaide Terrace Great West Road BRENTFORD. London. TW8 9PQ. UK. Tel: +44... Mobile: +44... Email: davewetzel42 at googlemail.com Web: www.LabourLand.org 
>  From : leminou Date : Wed, 8 Apr 2009 14:41:04 +0200 To : < project2012 at googlegroups.com > Subject : [project2012] Re: Peace and Non-Peace 
>  So we need to stop using mobile phone, computer, car as there all source of  Cobalt where we get them almost for free:It come from The Democratic of Congo which this Country is the most rich and controversially become the most poor.