I don't think so. Most of ET reads P&R believe it or not. I have gotten some PMs from people who have never posted in the basement. Our front page is constantly rolling. If we stop with the ad homs and give honest views from the left and the right, it might actually do some folks some good.
Honestly it sounds like too much work for me, I'm not really interested. I come here to post my opinions and occasional fact to back it up , otherwise I'd have to be paid for my efforts if you want a bunch of research. Sorry but that's the situation.
I'll throw out a topic just to get things started. Economics.... The idea is to scrap the entire tax code as it stands now and replace it with land value tax based as a flat % of unimproved land value. To guide the discussion, we might wonder why this type of tax has the best credentials and broadest support amongst economists of any type of tax imaginable. It results in the least amount of dead weight loss and supposedly provides the best incentive structure for economic growth. Yet it is oddly the one that we avoid the most. Who wants to start?
It would be less muddled if we started a separate thread. It can be the one thread where we can actually come up with some ideas to call our congressman about.
Please start the thread Epic, and I will need to do some homework, for one. Are you sure you and Ivan did not cook this up?
The govt land is generally exempt from taxation. As all tax revenue is fungible, they would essentially be using other land tax to pay their own land tax, which would be a wash. But that brings up an interesting point. Govt programs that would restrict development would result in reduction of potential revenue. The govt is thereby incentivized not to pursue large land grabs.
Ok, shall I start it here or in economics? I'm not really sure who Ivan is, but I've been considering the idea of land tax as a preferable system for a little while. I'd like to hear an honest debate from multiple perspectives.