> The labor share of income in 35 advanced economies fell from around 54 percent in 1980 to 50.5 percent in 2014.
3.5% in 34 years is not exactly something to get all luddite about.
Also keep in mind, that it's not the capital share that's expanding at the expense of labour. It's the share that goes to land that's taking from labour. The capital share is relatively stable. (Alas, few apart from the Georgists care about differentiating between land and capital.)
Land is capital. And the importance of land in economies have lessened quite a bit from the 19th century.
And even Henry George wasn't really a Geoist. He criticized all forms of unearned income, and called for e.g. abolition of intellectual property and nationalization of banks.
Yes, Henry George had some good ideas, but nobody is perfect. His ideas about the business cycle were also rubbish.
The supply of land is fixed. We can make more capital.
If you tax land or labour, you get less of them. If you tax land, it's still the same amount. Land is also hard to hide [citation needed], so tax evasion is harder.
3.5% in 34 years is not exactly something to get all luddite about.
Also keep in mind, that it's not the capital share that's expanding at the expense of labour. It's the share that goes to land that's taking from labour. The capital share is relatively stable. (Alas, few apart from the Georgists care about differentiating between land and capital.)
reply