theiu view spring 2014
DESCRIPTION
The TRADE issue Newsletter of the International Union for Land Value TaxationTRANSCRIPT
February 2014
the TRADE issue Newsletter of the International Union for Land Value Taxation
CONTENTS: Land Value Tax in the NEWS............ 2 Bits and Pieces ................................ 3 IU Member Activities ...................... 5 IU United Nations NGO report........ 6 Free Trade, Fair Trade or Plunder? .. 7 Top Secret Trade Rules.................... 9 Fast Track and the TPP.................... 10 Free Trade Agreements.................. 12 Trade Action Items......................... 15 Lefmann on Monopolies & Trade .. 16 Citizen’s Dividend .......................... 17 IU President’s Letter ..................... 18
the IU view
2
the IU view
Newsletter of the
International Union for
Land Value Taxation
theIU.org
IU View Editor/General
Secretary Alanna Hartzok
Skype: alanna.hartzok
Membership Secretary Ole Lefmann
41 Coleraine Road
London N8 0QJ UK
IU President Dave Wetzel
Immediate Past President
Fernando Scornik-Gerstein
Deputy President Wendy Rockwell
Second Deputy President Bill Batt
Vice Presidents
Argentina –H. R. Sandler
Australia – Jane McNab
Belgium –Niels Charlier
Canada - Frank Peddle
Denmark – J.R. Christensen
Germany – Dirk Löhr
Honduras – Quisia Gonzalez
Ireland – Emer O’Siochru
New Zealand – Robert Keall
Nicaragua – Paul Martin
Nigeria – Gordon Abiama
South Africa – K. McShannon
Russia Federation T. Roskoshnaya UK – David Triggs
USA – Ed Dodson
Additional ExCom Members
UK - Tommas Graves and
Carol Wilcox
USA - Nic Tideman
LVT in the
News
Breaking News! Small
Island Nation of Curaçao
Shifts to Land Value Tax
Property tax will disappear in
2014.... replaced, by the Land
Value Tax (LVT).
http://www.curacaochronicle.co
m/main/from-property-tax-to-
land-value-tax-starting-in-2014
The Economist endorses
Land Value Taxation
The shortage of housing is a gathering
national crisis. Jan 11th 2014 (UK) ... In the past
year wages have risen by 1%;
property prices are up by
8.4%... If since 1971 the price
of groceries had risen as steeply
as the cost of housing, a chicken
would cost £51 ($83)... the
ideal solution would be a tax
on the value of land. This
would be low or zero for
agricultural land and would
jump as soon as permission to
build is granted. It would prod
builders to get to work quickly.
It would also help to capture the
gains in house prices that result
from investment in transport or
schools.
Solutions old and new to
the housing crisis
The Guardian, 18 December
2013 Ed Miliband's proposals
to prevent the hoarding of
land by developers and
unhelpful neighbouring
councils (Report, 16
December) marks the return
of the land value question to
the mainstream political
agenda, which was once
taken up by the issue and its
proposed solution, the land
value tax, with pro-LVT
arguments from the Physio-
crats, Adam Smith, the Mills,
father and son, and, most
spectacularly, Henry
George.http://www.theguardian.co
m/business/2013/dec/18/solutions-old-new-housing-crisis
Zoe Williams on Channel 4
News suggesting that LVT is the
solution to the problem of
unaffordable housing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r
JvbfhJY2KM&feature=youtu.be&a
Five Economic Reforms
Millennials Should Be
Fighting For
by Jesse A. Myerson, Rolling
Stone (January 3, 2014) Here
are the five: 1. Guaranteed work
for everybody, 2. universal basic
income, 3. take back the land
with land-value tax and large-
scale community land trusts, 4.
sovereign wealth funds like the
Alaska Permanent Fund and 5.
public banks like the one in
North Dakota. After writing the
article Myerson was the subject
of great deal of controversy with
over ten thousand comments and
a CNBC interview with a
conservative commentator.
3
ear our Earthsharing
Australia colleague Karl
Fitzgerald talk about the global
race for unearned income, LVT
as counterweight to mortgage
debt and MUCH MORE in this
excellent interview on one of
the world’s leading podcasts, the
Extraenvironmentalist.
earthsharing.org.au/
The young are doomed – and only the old can save them
Twentysomethings are being
forced to delay adulthood,
writes Chris Cook in the
Financial Times ....a world of
ever-escalating house prices will
embed inequality. House price
rises show up as a cost for those
who do not own housing and an
increase in wealth (and perhaps
income) for those who do.
Unfairness between generations
drives unfairness within them. If
the only people who can afford
to buy housing are the children
of people who bought housing,
it creates an unbridgeable divide
between the haves and the have-
nots. .... How about a land value
tax levied on house prices? It
would hit the older harder, the
younger less and cut dwelling
costs by encouraging the cash-
poor and asset-rich elderly to
move into more modest accom-
modation. Using the tax system
to force people from their family
homes would test the cold-
heartedness of any politician.
But the status quo is pretty cruel,
too.
Britain has a land value tax of
sorts! the catch? its set at a
negative rate, and only for
owners of farmland… --Faisal
Islam, Economics Editor of
Channel 4 News
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/st
atus/375585937348378624
BITS & Pieces
In Race to register
‘manorial’ rights as feudal
remnants swept away Chris
Tighe seems to indicate that land
rights justice is emerging in the
UK. However, a deeper read
into the article shows that the
simple requirement to register
subsurface mineral lands held by
aristocrats and Church will
formalize, not nullify, these
ancient entitlements. The Land
Registry will simply be a way
for buyers of surface land to find
out whether or not someone else
“owns” the land down under
their feet. How far down is not
clear.
2014 Demographia Housing
Affordability Survey
The 10th Annual Demographic
International Housing Afforda-
bility Survey has just been
released and, once again, ranks
Australia as having one of the
most expensive housing markets
out of the countries survey.
Residential Property Taxes
in the United States
Brookings Tax Policy Center November 18, 2013
This brief by Benjamin H.
Harris and Brian David Moore
presents an overview of resi-
dential property taxes in the
United States... The counties
with the highest property tax
burdens tend to be in New York
and New Jersey, while Alabama
and Louisiana have the lowest.
Renting for life? Housing
shift requires rethink of
renters' rights by Kate Shaw
who tells us that Australia is the
world capital for property
speculation.... The contribution
to GDP of real estate
transactions alone is the highest
in the world, and three times
higher than that in the US….
Renters are the losers in the
property game.
The late Vic Blundell wrote an
excellent paper on the
disadvantages of DLT see:
http://www.cooperativeindividu
alism.org/blundell-vic_labours-
flawed-land-acts-1993.html
“The beauty of LVT is that it
does not require an event in
order to be charged - and
therefore can not be avoided.
LVT applies to all land - not just
sites suitable for development or
change of use,” says Dave
Wetzel, IU President
Richard Wilkinson’s great
TedTalk on how Economic
Inequality harms societies
- not to be missed!
Senator Elizabeth Warren,
author of Two-Income Trap:
Why Middle Class Mothers and
Fathers are Going Broke
describes the working of the
Law of Rent without realizing
this in her interview about what
is happening to the middle class
two income families. Go to 40
minute mark here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch
?v=S1Uk-DwUvJw
H
4
GLOBAL DEBT CLOCK
Thank you to the Georgist
Education Association for
these interesting links: http://www.debtclock.com.au/
http://www.usdebtclock.org/wor
ld-debt-clock.html
The imperative of land
reform BusinessDay Land
is the most unique and most
strategic of all the factors of
production: capital, labour
and enterprise. Its availability
plays a pivotal role in the
development of ... See all stories on this topic »
The Progress Report informs
that a recent New York
Times article reveals the
“true origin of the Monopoly
Game.”
“The current structure of
farm subsidies epitomises the
British government’s
defining project: capitalism
for the poor, socialism for the
rich.” – George Monbiot in
his article Robber Barons. http://www.monbiot.com/201
3/07/01/robber-barons/
To reduce carbon
emissions, we must tax
fossil fuels -- but, say the
pundits, we can't do so
because the tax would be
regressive, clobbering the
poor. In fact, a carbon tax
would operate much like a
diamond tax, a tax on the one
percent, for reasons both of
demand and supply. More
from Georgist professor Dr.
Polly Cleveland here:
http://inequality.org/taxing-
carbon-taxing-diamonds/
An Outraged Bill Moyers
Exposes the System for
What It Is.
Are (US) Taxpayers
Getting Their Fair Share
of Oil Royalties?
Ben Geman tells us about a
new report calling for
changes in the federal oil-
and-gas royalty system.
The (US) Interior Department
should beef up efforts to ensure
taxpayers get a fair return on
billions of dollars worth of
petroleum that oil and gas
companies produce from federal
lands and waters, congressional
auditors said. A Government
Accountability Office report looks
critically at the intricate system
of lease terms for companies
that took in over $66 billion in
fiscal 2012 from the sale of
petroleum produced in federally
owned regions. The report is
most critical of Interior's
management of onshore areas,
arguing that regulators have
been sluggish in trying to adjust
royalty rates that have remained
static at 12.5 percent even as oil
prices—and companies'
returns—have soared.
"As a result of not successfully
changing federal regulations to
provide itself with the flexibility
needed to make timely
adjustments to onshore lease
terms, Interior's ability to ensure
that the public is receiving a fair
return is limited," the report
states. "Moreover, Interior
continues to offer onshore leases
with lease terms—terms lasting
the life of the lease—that have
not been adjusted in response to
changing market conditions,
potentially foregoing a
considerable amount of
revenue," adds the report that
Senate Energy and Natural
Resources Committee Chairman
Ron Wyden, D-Ore., requested.
It credits Interior with some
improvements, including in the
management of offshore
development, where royalty rates
have increased, but said more is
needed. That's especially true for
onshore regions, where Interior has
less leeway to make changes absent
formal changes to its regulations.
Oil and gas producers paid the
federal government $10 billion in
royalties and other payments in
fiscal 2012 from federal lands and
waters, but the report suggests a better return is possible.
Interior, in a response to GAO
included with the report, said it's
working to address recommend-
dations to update its rules and
policies. The department's plans
include a new regulation that will
allow Interior "broad flexibility" to
set onshore royalty rates, according
to a letter to GAO from Rhea Suh,
Interior's assistant secretary for
policy, management, and budget.
Wyden has said he hopes to
improve the federal system that
governs energy royalties….Wyden
said the GAO report "drives home
the point" that Interior "may not be keeping up with times."
"The Interior Department has an
obligation to ensure American
taxpayers are getting a fair return
for commercial use of their public
lands. Since a major share of
onshore royalties also go to states
and Indian tribes, shortcomings in
royalty collections also short those
states and Tribes," he said.
Editors note: Click here for
Extractive Resource Taxation by
Mason Gaffney and here for an
analysis of the Alaska Permanent
Fund, a model resource rent fund.
5
Godfrey Dunkley gave a
lecture (November 3, 2013) at
the School of Philosophy
symposium held at Christ
Church Grammar School,
Claremont, (Perth, WA.)
Godfrey used graphs to show the
loss to public revenue when
governments fail to collect the
economic rent of land.
Speculators Lock-Up
Housing Stock
Karl Fitzgerald reports that
there are 64,465 empty
Melbourne homes, as prices
escalate. Prosper Australia in
a November news release
tells us that This is akin to a
7.3% unemployment rate for
land...Why isn't this hidden
housing supply included in
supply side analysis?...This
was the most extensive
Speculative Vacancies report
yet covering a full 12 months
... Ninety-four percent of
Melbourne's residential
properties were analysed.”
From Adam Parsons, Share
the World’s Resources:
Our new website at
www.sharing.org went live
this week, and we hope in the
new year to initiate a
campaign statement for
‘sharing the world’s
resources’, which we’ll let
you know about.
IU Member & Associates Activities &
Concerns
Paul Martin, Director of the
Henry George International
Education Center (HGIEC)
in Nicaragua writes: We
have turned out a record
number of students from our
course and grew the Georgist
Community Fund while
increasing member
participation.
Nicaraguan HGIEC Graduates
Paul is now exploring the
development of a compre-
hensive georgist education
system and further reports
that “we completed the last
major construction and most
of the functional detailing of
our facility.” Paul invites IU
members to learn about the
work of HGIEC and to
consider joining the Georgist
Community Fund by
checking out their website:
www.ceihg.org
The Henry George International
Education Center in Managua,
Nicaragua
Association for Good
Government (Australia)
reports this concern of John
Massam: There are huge
percentages of land purchases
by global companies that are
being contracted in all the
inhabited continents Perth's
central business district has
an uncomfortable high
percentage in overseas hands.
Does it concern you that in
our near-neighbour
Cambodia 46 per cent of
farmland is NOT owned by
Cambodians? (New
Internationalist, May 2013,
page 23) And 11 per cent of
Australia's farmland it NOT
owned by Australians.
"What has destroyed every previous civilization has been the tendency to the unequal distribution
of wealth and power" Henry George
After viewing Why Mayors
Should Rule the World Josh
Vincent, Director of the US
based Center for the Study of
Economics wrote: I've been putting forward the idea at
municipal government
conferences that the states and
the cities might have to catch
much of the responsibility and
opportunity for the future if the
federal government continues to
grind to a halt and perhaps
collapse. It may be time for
people to consider a much looser
confederation of regions rather
than a super state based in
Washington DC.
Ted Talk Play list of nine
talks about Our Future in
Cities
6
The IU is officially
affiliated with the UN through both the Department
of Public Information and the
UN Economic and Social
Council (ECOSOC). We
have recently joined forces
with several other UN
nongovernmental
organizations (NGOs) to
form the Commons Action
for the UN and the Commons
Cluster. We are working
together to bring a commons
perspective fully into the
view of other UN NGOs and
UN official delegates, as well
as contributing policy input
to the current Sustainable
Development Post-2015
proceedings.
November, December 2013:
Two papers (see IU website)
written and distributed during
the SDG Proceedings held in
the UN Trusteeship Chamber:
Commons Rent / Land
Value Tax Policy for
Sustainable Cities and
Human Settlements addressed these areas:
Commons Rent Public Finance
as a Planning Tool, Commons
Rent Approach for Affordable
Housing for All, and Commons
Rent and Climate Change
Recommendations
The other paper was The
Human Right to the Earth with this subtitle: A Commons Rent Approach to Public
Finance for the SDGs Based
on an Ethic of Fairly Sharing
the Value of the Earth.
IU United Nations NGO
Report
Most UN sessions can be
viewed live and recorded
here: http://webtv.un.org/
The UN Open Working
Group on Sustainable
Development Reports here:
http://www.worldsustainabilit
yfund.nl/i19.html#m2.__,_
Alanna Hartzok speaks on
Inequality and Financing
Sustainable Development in this video recorded in the
UN Trusteeship Council
Chamber for the United
Nations Sustainable
Development Knowledge
Platform. Alanna is IU UN
NGO Representative, IU
General Secretary and Global
Outreach Coordinator for the
Robert Schalkenbach
Foundation. In this brief
video, Ms Hartzok focuses on
unequal land distribution as
well as the role of taxation
and rents for financing
sustainable development.
http://www.youtube.com/w
atch?v=-EYQP-tLVms
From IU President Dave
Wetzel: Congratulations for
raising these issues at the UN
Alanna....we need to be
careful not to be seen
advocating Development
Land Taxes as opposed to an
annual Land Value Tax. The
late Vic Blundell wrote an
excellent paper on the
disadvantages of DLT, go to
http://www.cooperativeindivi
dualism.org/blundell-
vic_labours-flawed-land-acts-
1993.html
The beauty of LVT is that it
does not require an event in
order to be charged - and
therefore cannot be avoided.
To Alanna from Adam
Parsons, Share the Worlds
Resources: ....we were glad to
see your advocacy of LVT at
the UN this week; we’ve
published your NGO state-
ment on our social net-
working sites, as here on FB: https://www.facebook.com/notes/sh
are-the-worlds-resources/the-
human-right-to-the-
earth/10153600315170434
Teckla Negga Melchior,
Quisia Gonzalez and
Alanna Hartzok, all IU UN
NGO Representatives, spoke
during two programs held in
New York on January 18th
co-sponsored by the Communications Coordination
Committee for the UN, Earth
Rights Institute and the
Henry George School of
Social Science. The morning
program was titled Women,
Earth and Economic
Power. For the afternoon
session, titled Land Rights
and Human Rights on
Trial: Turning the Tables on
Genocide and Ecocide, Rev.
Kevin Annett gave a
firsthand account of The Case
of the Ahousaht People,
Weyerhauser, and the United
Church of Canada.
7
ome people new to the IU
may not know that the full
name of our organization is
The International Union for
Land Value Taxation and Free
Trade. There is a reason why we
usually just call it The IU, and
this is not just because the full
name is a mouthful. The IU was
founded in 1926. Linking LVT
and Free Trade affirmed the two
major approaches to economic
freedom and fairness that Henry George wrote about so eloquently
and worked for so passionately.
Plunder by raids has
evolved into plunder by
trade. – J.W. Smith
“Free trade” now means
monopolizing the resources and
markets of weak nations, says
J.W. Smith in his book
Economic Democracy. The
several various so-called “free
trade” agreements brokered over
the past several years have
severely damaged both people
and planet.
This special focus TRADE issue
of the IU Newsletter brings you
information and analysis
essential to understanding why
having the phrase “free trade” in
the name of our organization no
longer helps our “cause” but
indicates that we are on the side
of the monopolists rather than
standing with those who want to
build a world of economic
justice for all.
A name is a brand. Rather than
try to hide the full name of our
brand, we need to change it. In
this age of the internet in just a
few minutes anyone can uncover
our full name and thus make
assumptions about us that are
entirely incorrect. There is no
time or opportunity to explain
one-on-one what WE mean by
“free trade.” It is difficult
enough for us to enlighten
people about the land problem.
And most thoughtful, caring and
TRADING OR RAIDING, THAT IS THE QUESTION!
well informed people in this day
and age will likely not want to
hear about land value taxation if
we appear pro “free trade” since
this term is now associated with
numerous inequities.
Here are summaries, overviews
and links to articles, books and
videos that tell us what is really
going on with “free trade
agreements.” Here are many
opportunities for YOU to
engage with trade issues from
the land rights and LVT point of
view.
The Unfair Trade: How Our
Broken Global Financial
System Destroys the Middle
Class is a recent book by
Michael Casey, a native of Perth, Western Australia, and a
managing editor at Dow Jones
and the Wall Street Journal in
New York where he specializes
in global financial markets.
Casey seems an unlikely
candidate to author a book about
unfair trade. Looking at the
global financial crisis through
the stories of ordinary citizens
around the world, the thesis of
this book is that our current
system of trade is, well,
UNFAIR.
Noam Chomsky on the
SECRET Trans Pacific
Partnership
So what is the Trans-Pacific
Partnership Treaty (TPP)? (Click above for a brief video.)
The Trans-Pacific
Partnership Agreement
("TPP") is a free trade agreement currently being
negotiated by nine countries:
The United States, Australia,
Brunei Darussalam, Chile,
Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru,
Singapore, and Vietnam.
Although the TPP covers a wide
range of issues, this site focuses
on the TPP's intellectual
property (IP) chapter.
The US entered into negotia-
tions for a regional trans-pacific
trade agreement in March 2008.
As of mid-2012, there have been
13 rounds of secretive
negotiations, 5 leaks of proposed
text, and very little involvement
of the public… Everything we
know about the TPP, we know
from leaks. The negotiators have
not once willingly given the
public, or public interest
organizations, any information.
… The schedule for negotiation
has recently accelerated in order
to bring the agreement to a
close. The process has become
more and more closed
These guys
must have
access to the
Commons
From Roger Hickey, Campaign
for America’s Future: What is
the Trans-Pacific Partnership?
We don’t know what’s in it, but
we know who wrote it:
Corporate lobbyists and
representatives of countries that
include repressive regimes with
no concern for labor or
environmental standards.
S
8
Matt Lockshin, Campaign
Manager CREDO Action from
Working Assets informs us that:
The Trans-Pacific Partnership
(TPP) is a terrible "trade" deal
being negotiated in secret by the
governments of a dozen
countries colluding with
corporate interests. Under the
TPP, more American jobs would
be offshored. Internet freedom
would be a joke. Developing
countries would lose access to
lifesaving medicines. Unsafe
foods and products could pour
into our country. And that’s just
the tip of the iceberg.
Shamshahrin Shamsudin/European
Pressphoto Agency - In Kuala Lumpur, Malaysians protest a trade proposal
between the United States and a dozen
Pacific Rim countries.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership
Treaty is the Complete
Opposite of 'Free Trade' Mark Weisbrot stated in The Guardian (November 19, 2013): It is quite amazing that a treaty
like the TPP can still be pro-
moted as a "free trade"
agreement when its most
economically important
provisions are the exact
opposite of "free trade" - the
expansion of protectionism.
Lax food safety regulation,
unregulated fracking,
overseas job shifts,
rocketing drug prices,
Internet monopolies,
slashes to public services to
profit Wall Street robbers...
these are just some of the
effects the TPP's passing will
have on our world.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership is
set to create a virtually perma-
nent corporate rule over the
people. This is the trade scam
NAFTA globalized, a devil's
deal that has nothing to do
with trade and everything to
do with corporate protectionism
— of the 29 chapters in the
TPP, only FIVE actually
cover trade issues!
- Kevin Zeese & Margaret Flowers
The Trans-Pacific Partnership
(TPP) would strip our
constitutional rights, while
offering no gains for the
majority of Americans. It's a
win for corporation
Food and Water Watch
weighs in with alarm: If You
Thought NAFTA Was Bad, You
Ain’t Seen Nothing Yet and a
question: What’s Fracking Got
to Do with Free Trade? A: Japan
Mitch Jones, Common
Resources Program Director,
Food and Water Watch,
pictured above, writes: The
TPP is being sold as just
another “free trade” agree-
ment. But don’t be fooled,
it’s so much more. Only two
of the twenty-six chapters of
the agreement are directly trade related.
… The TPP would permanently
enshrine the very economic
system that has lead to greater
imbalances in income and
wealth and increasing economic
crises – all enforced by new
international tribunals akin to
the WTO. It’s outrageous.
We know that the TPP would
decrease the ability of govern-
ments to issue regulations that
would protect the environment,
rein in the financial interests,
protect food safety and push
renewable energy while
protecting us from risky
practices like fracking for
shale gas. What’s more, it
would make offshoring of jobs
easier and Wall Street banks
would be able to set up shop in
any member country with little
oversight.
ut what’s really
frightening is that if
completed, the TPP will be
left open for any country to
join. That means if we allow
the TPP to move forward, no
other trade agreement would
ever have to be negotiated
again. Instead countries
could be added to the TPP,
moving it from …regional
agreement to a global
leviathan.
http://www.flickr.com/photo
B
9
WikiLeaks published the
secret draft chapter of
Trans-Pacific Partnership
on November 13, 2013, The
Guardian (UK) said that:
ikiLeaks has released
the draft text of a
chapter of the Trans-Pacific
Partnership (TPP) agreement,
a multi-lateral free-trade
treaty currently being
negotiated in secret by 12
Pacific Rim nations. Negotiations for the TPP have ...
been conducted behind closed
doors. "The US administration
is aggressively pushing the
TPP through the US legislative
process on the sly," says Julian
Assange, the founder and editor-
in-chief of WikiLeaks. "If
instituted," Assange continues,
"the TPP's intellectual property
regime would trample over
individual rights and free
expression, as well as ride
roughshod over the intellectual
and creative commons. If you
read, write, publish, think,
listen, dance, sing or invent; if
you farm or consume food; if
you're ill now or might one
day be ill, the TPP has you in
its crosshairs."
Kevin Zeese discusses:
WikiLeaks recently released
documents which shed light on
the status of the ongoing TPP
negotiations… deep
disagreement between the
United States and negotiating
parties on intellectual property,
agricultural subsidies, and
financial services. …the United
States (is) trying to bully
countries to really do unethical
things.
TPP is a Gift to Trans-
National Corporations … trade
could be designed to put people
and planet above profits...(there)
should be a Fair Trade Frame-
work … (that is) open,
transparent and participatory.
**************
The full text of TPP leaked by
Wikileaks November 13, 2013:
https://wikileaks.org/tpp/
************
Top Secret Trade Rules?
Spiders Weaving in the Night.
The proposed terms of the
Trans-Pacific Partnership
deal are secret. The Obama
administration, like many of its
predecessors, has registered the
trade platform as classified
information, to the chagrin of
lawmakers. Although several
dozen corporate officials and a
handful of public interest
experts are given access to the
negotiation information, they are
not permitted to disclose it to the
public or the press. Staffers for
members of Congress also are
denied access to the terms.
– Matt Lockshin
Democracy Now! interviews
Lori Wallach -“This is a
One Percenter power tool
that could rip up our basic
human rights.”
https://www.youtube.com/wa
tch?v=LmMsZAVnySI
InfoWars Blows the Lid Off
Secret Trade Agreement - https://www.youtube.com/watch
?v=FhzUGiYeZA4
Lori Wallach
"A Corporate Trojan Horse":
Obama Pushes Secretive TPP
Trade Pact, Would Rewrite
Swath of U.S. Laws – Lori
Wallach, director of Public
Citizen’s Global Trade Watch
https://www.youtube.com/watch
?v=CS-x5SlcPPM
Obama’s covert trade deal by Lori Wallach, and Ben
Beachy, research director for
Public Citizen’s Global Trade
Watch division. New York Times
published June 2, 3013.
TPP - Backroom Deal
for the 1%
The Murphy Institute –
Center for Labor, Community
and Policy Studies https://www.youtube.com/watch
?v=VewGARXnG-0
Fast-Tracking the Future?
The enactment of the TPP
will hinge upon the passage
of so-called “fast-track
trade authority,” which
would allow the president to
sign off on the TPP before the
American people or Congress
ever have a chance to read it.
W
Alex
Jones
Reports
10
In the US the so-called “fast-
track trade authority” is an
attempt by the President backed
by 600 corporate lobbyists who
are in on the deal to quickly pass
through the US Congress the
agreements they have made in
secret even though elected
representatives and the country’s
citizens and media have had no
access to the trade agreement
documents.
Richard Eskow, Campaign
for America's Future
Fast-tracking could become the
model for a new and pro-
foundly subversive model of
governance - one in which
elected government becomes little more than an after-thought to
corporate-backed deal-making.
The Huffington Post reported
Trans-Pacific Partnership
Talks Stir House Bipartisan
Opposition. This link includes a
seven minute video on the issue.
Under the garb of “free
trade” is a massive
corporate power grab.
"Under Fast Track, the executive
branch is empowered to sign trade
agreements before Congress has an
opportunity to vote on them, and
then unilaterally write legislation
making the pacts' terms U.S. federal
law," reads a letter from 22 House
Republicans. "Fast Track allows the
president to send these executive
branch-authored bills directly to the
floor for a vote under rules
forbidding all floor amendments and
limiting debate. ... We do not
agree to cede our constitu-
tional authority to the
executive."
Something is Fishy about
“Free Trade”
More on Fast Track and
the Trans Pacific
Partnership (TPP)
In March Japan announced its
plans to join the TPP. South
Korea is also considering
joining and there has been some
talk of China joining, too....
Since "Fast Track" authority
was first used in 1973, U.S.
wages have remand flat while
worker productivity has
doubled. The expansion of free
trade could increase offshoring
of jobs.
TPP could undermine efforts
to regulate Wall Street,
including the use of a
Financial Transaction Tax on
the sort of risky bets that lead
to the financial crisis.
Also see Democracy Now: http://www.democracynow.org/
2013/11/14/tpp_exposed_wikile
aks_publishes_secret_trade
http://www.democracynow.org/
2013/10/4/a_corporate_trojan_h
orse_obama_pushes
http://www.democracynow.org/
2013/6/6/obama_backed_trans_
pacific_partnership_expands
http://www.democracynow.org/
2012/6/14/breaking_08_pledge_
leaked_trade_doc
The World Trade Organization
What's Going on at the WTO?
Opportunities and Risks Before
the 9th Ministerial Meeting
Deborah James Director,
International Programs at
the Center for Economic
and Policy Research,
November 18, 2013
fter more than three
decades of experience with
a corporate-led model of global-
ization, it is clear that this
particular globalization has
failed workers, farmers, and the
environment, while facilitating
the vast enrichment of a
privileged few.
Given this history of
damaging WTO (World
Trade Organ-ization)
impacts, there has never been
a better time to "Stop the
Expansion of the WTO and Shut
Down the Corporate "Trade"
Attack: Food, Jobs, Peoples'
Rights and Sustainable
Development First!"
The Our World Is Not for Sale
(OWINFS) network asserts that the
global trade framework must work
for the 99%... it must provide
countries sufficient policy space to
pursue a positive agenda for
development and job-creation, and
must facilitate, rather than hinder,
global efforts to ensure true food
security, sustainable development,
access to affordable healthcare and
medicines, and global financial
stability. And it must privilege
global agreements on human rights
and environmental sustainability
over corporate profit.…
A
11
It is a little-known but
outrageous asymmetry in the
current WTO rules, that while
developed countries are allowed
to massively subsidize their
agriculture (to the tens or
hundreds of billions annually),
only 17 developing countries are
allowed to subsidize over a
minimal amount. The UN
Special Rapporteur on the Right
to Food criticized the current
WTO agricultural rules in
advance of the last WTO
Ministerial through a stinging
report, "The World Trade
Organization and the Post-
Global Food Crisis Agenda:
Putting Food Security First in
the International Food System,"
which ruffled quite a few
feathers at the WTO.
…While the global framework
of these rules is set by the WTO,
these same policies also appear
in an even more extreme form,
in regional and bilateral so-
called Free Trade Agreements
(FTAs) that have led to job loss,
food price volatility, and
increased foreign corporate
control over public services and
natural resources. And the recent
proliferation of Bilateral
Investment Treaties (BITs) has
led to many developing
countries being taken to private
courts by transnational
corporations, resulting in the
overturning of many health,
safety, and environmental laws,
as well as awards in the billions
of dollars from taxpayers to
corporations. –Deborah James
“Trade” Bullies - Kevin Zeese
http://consciouslifenews.com/wi
kileaks-tpp-revelations-show-
refusing-negotiate-trying-bully-
countries-unethical/1168736/
How Can Trade Ever Be
Fair When So Few Own
So Much?
85 people have more
wealth than 3.5 billion http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/
21/85-richest-people_n_4641021.html
Oxfam Briefing Paper
Jon Stewart Daily Show
Jon Stewart Ridicules the
Richest of the Rich for
Pretending to be Concerned
About Economic Inequality
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-january-23-2014/mountain-few
More than Half of All Members of Congress
Are Millionaires
Inequality for Dummies by BILL KELLER New York Times: December 22, 2013
FOOD, SEEDS & TRADE
The global struggle for
peasants seeds: A struggle
for our future Food First -
November 25th, 2013
http://www.foodfirst.org/en/s
eed+diversity
In the mix of these unfair “free
trade” agreements are grave
concerns about how our food is
produced and who produces it.
While the seed industry seeks
to patent and monopolize the
planet’s seed diversity a recent
UNCTAD report, titled Wake
Up Before It’s Too Late, tells
us that corporate controlled
agribusiness is not providing
sufficient affordable food where
needed while causing mounting
environmental damage. The
UNCTAD paper says that the
strategy being recommended to
developing countries of relying
on international markets to meet
staple food demand, while
specializing in the production
and export of 'lucrative' cash
crops has not has not resulted in
food security for all.
The UNCTAD report calls for
regional/local food production
through 'logical' market mecha-
nisms stating that “trade rules
need to allow a higher regional
focus of agriculture along the
lines of as much regionalized
localized food production as
possible; as much traded food as
necessary. Weighing in on the
12
side of the monopolists and faux
free traders, as Food First
reports in The Global Struggle
for Peasant Seeds, the Obama
administration is quietly pushing
forward with trade deals…many
of these trade agreements
include specific conditions
regarding seeds and intellectual
property rights which pose a
direct threat to people’s seed and
food sovereignty
AUSTRALIA Free Trade Agreement
For a good overview of the
political power struggle as
Australia wrestles with trade
agreements take a read through
Australia's Rejection of
Investor-State, from AUSFTA
to the Gillard Government's
Trade Policy and the
implications for Canada by
Canadian Janet M Eaton. The
paper quotes New Zealand Law
Professor Jane Kelsey and US
based international trade lawyer
Lori Wallach who say in their
paper Investor State Dispute in
Trade Pacts Threaten
Fundamental Principles of
National Justice:
“Free trade agreements (FTAs)
and bilateral investment treaties
(BITs) impose obligations on
host governments to provide
foreign investors with new
privileges, but few if any social
or environmental obligations are
required of the investors.”
Australian Council of Trade
Unions ACTU Submission to
the Department of Foreign
Affairs and Trade on the
proposed Trans-Pacific
Partnership Agreement, 21
June 2010
http://www.actu.org.au/Images/
Dynamic/attachments/7018/AC
TU%20Submission_Trans%20P
acific%20Partnership%20Agree
ment_DFAT_21%20June%2020
10.pdf
Australian Fair Trade
Investment Network
The Trans-Pacific Partnership
Agreement (TPP) Corporate
power versus peoples’ rights (AFTINET: Australian Fair
Trade Investment Network)
http://aftinet.org.au/cms/trans-
pacific-partnership-agreement
EU – CANADA Trade Agreement
Janet Eaton keeps a close eye
on Trade Agreements with a
special focus on Canada. This
links to one of her articles:
Earth Day, Earth Day, Tar
Sands, Free Trade & Degrowth
– Connecting the Dots
November 19, 2013 -
From Janet Eaton:
Stop the Corporate Giveaway! A
transatlantic plea for no Investor
-state in CETA and A
transatlantic plea for sanity in
the EU–Canada CETA
negotiations (Canada / Europe
Trade Agreement)
The following transatlantic
statement, (Edit note: see
weblink for complete
statement)signed by more than
100 organizations calls upon
European and Canadian
governments at all levels (e.g.
member state, province,
municipalities, federal and EU
parliament) to protest the
inclusion of an unnecessary
investment protection chapter
and investor-to-state dispute
settlement process (ISDS) for
the following reasons:
1. We are locking in the
corporate status-quo forever :
2. There is no way to tame this
investor “rights” model
3. The very presence of ISDS
puts a “chill” on environmental
policy.
4. Canadian and European
courts can handle any investor
dispute with government
decisions.
5. There is no conclusive
evidence that these investor
“rights” encourages new
investment!
6. CETA is a step-up/stepping
stone for the bigger U.S.-EU
TTIP:
It concludes:
"the CETA investments chapters
come nowhere close and are in
fact drifting further away from
balancing the rights of sovereign
nations, including Indigenous
nations, to enact policies in the
public interests with the
responsibility to treat foreign
investors fairly. If the CETA is
signed and ratified with ISDS
intact, Canadian and European
democracy will suffer while
corporations gain new tools to
frustrate any number of policies
designed to protect the
environment, public health,
public services, resource
conservation and, crucially, to
make our social-economies
more sustainable and equitable.
All political
representatives at every
level of government in the
EU and Canada must call
the investment negotiations
in CETA to a hold and
refuse to endorse the
CETA until the extreme
investor-state dispute
settlement process has
been taken out."
13
The Sierra Club Canada's Trade
and Environment Campaign, as
stated on their website, is
centered on the mounting
evidence that unfettered
economic globalization and its
agenda of free trade, deregu-
lation, and privatization
implemented over the past two
decades without public consul-
tation, has had a devastating
impact on our immediate
environment, the ecosystems of
the planet and broader planetary
cycles that are now deeply out
of balance from pollution,
depletion of resources and
excessive CO2 and other
emissions….
The Trade and Environment
Campaign works to increase
awareness of how globalization,
free trade and NAFTA impact
the environment and ecosystems
and works with the membership
and other national NGO´s and
coalitions to oppose trade
agreements that are harmful to
the environment, local
economies, and sovereignty.
Investor Protection Provisions Under
NAFTA
The North American Free
Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
was made between the
United States, Canada,
and Mexico, and took
effect January 1, 1994.
One of the more controversial
provisions in NAFTA (Chapter
11) involves the "investor-to-
state" dispute resolution process.
This provision provides a
vehicle and a forum for
corporations and other
companies to sue governments
directly for what is called
"regulatory expropriation",
which is similar to Eminent
Domain under domestic law. A
company may allege regulatory
Expropriation in such instances
as the actual taking of property
by a country through
condemnation, or constructive
taking by way of laws or
regulations that negatively affect
the commercial value of a
property. In order for a company
to bring suit under this
provision, it need only show that
it is an "investor party."
Investor-state dispute
settlement (ISDS) is a provision
in international trade treaties and
international investment
agreements that grants an
investor the right to initiate
dispute settlement proceedings
against a foreign government in
their own right under
international law. Much debate
has arisen concerning the impact
of investor-state provisions on
the capacity of democratically-
elected governments to
implement reforms and
legislative and policy programs
related to public health,
environmental protection and
human rights.[4]
Opponents argue that investor
state claims (or the threat of
them) inhibit the capacity of
domestic governments to pass
public health and environmental
protection legislation. They also
argue that arbitrations are
carried out in secret by trade
lawyers who earn income from
the parties and are not
accountable to the public or
required to take into account
broader constitutional and
international law human rights
norms.[5]
An example: August 25, 2008,
Dow AgroSciences LLC, a U.S.
corporation, served a Notice of
Intent to Submit a Claim to
Arbitration under Chapter 11 of
NAFTA, for losses allegedly
caused by a Quebec ban on the
sale and certain uses of lawn
pesticides containing the active
ingredient 2,4-D.[16]
The tribunal
issued a consent award as the
parties to the dispute reached a
settlement.[17]
At the end of 2011, at least 450
treaty-based investor-state
disputes were publicly known --
approximately 6.5 times more
than the 67 known cases ten
years earlier. Foreign investors
increasingly challenge host
countries’ regulatory activities,
such as environmental policies,
energy policies, health policies,
and policies related to economic
crises.
Digital rights activist Joe
Karaganis has described
investor-state dispute settlement
regulations as "corporate
sovereignty".[6]
According to
journalist Glyn Moody, the term
"represents the rise of the
corporation as an equal of the
nation state".
MEXICO - An Example
of Plunder by Trade
Twenty Years of NAFTA
It's tough to imagine Mexico
doing worse without
NAFTA. Perhaps this is part
of the reason why
Washington's proposed "Free
Trade Area of the Americas"
was roundly rejected by the
14
region in 2005 and the proposed
Trans-Pacific Partnership is running into trouble. Interestingly,
when economists who have
promoted NAFTA from the
beginning are called upon to
defend the agreement, the best
that they can offer is that it
increased trade. But trade is not,
to most humans, an end in itself.
And neither are the blatantly
mis-named "free trade
agreements". Mark Weisbrot, Economist, The Guardian (UK), January 4, 2014
NAFTA’s 20 Years of
Unfulfilled Promises
Manuel Perez-Rocha, Op-Ed:
his was supposed to boost
employment in Mexico.
Instead, NAFTA has
become an engine of
poverty in the country, forcing
millions of Mexicans to migrate
to the United States in search of
jobs. Under NAFTA, cheap
subsidized corn from the United
States flooded Mexico, making
it impossible for millions of
Mexican farmers to compete.
Government support previously
given to small farmers was
withdrawn and directed to big
agricultural exporting
corporations instead.
Related Stories
NAFTA Is Starving Mexico
By Laura Carlsen, Foreign
Policy in Focus | Report
NAFTA at 20: The New Spin
By Manuel Perez-Rocha and
Javier Rojo, Foreign Policy in
Focus | News Analysis
NAFTA at 20: State of the
North American Worker
By Jeff Faux, Foreign Policy in
Focus | News Analysis
Most Recent TPP Wikileaks Release
Press release: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) - Environment Chapter
Today, 15 January 2014,
WikiLeaks released the secret
draft text for the entire TPP
(Trans-Pacific Partnership)
Environment Chapter and the
corresponding Chairs' Report.
The TPP transnational legal
regime would cover 12 countries
initially and encompass 40 per
cent of global GDP and one-
third of world trade. The
Environment Chapter has long
been sought by journalists and
environmental groups. The
released text dates from the
Chief Negotiators' summit in
Salt Lake City, Utah, on 19-24
November 2013.
16 January 2014 TPP
Environment Chapter
Analysis by Professor Jane
Kelsey, New Zealand
Chapter addresses matters of
conservation, environment,
biodiversity, indigenous
knowledge and resources, over-
fishing and illegal logging, and
climate change, among others. It
might be expected to provide
balance to the commercial
interests being advanced in the
other chapters, and genuine
protections that are consistent
with international environmental
law. Instead of a 21st century
standard of protection, the
leaked text shows that the
obligations are weak and
compliance with them is
unenforceable. The corporate
agenda wins both ways.
Framing the issue in
these terms, [free trade
vs. protectionism] ... is no
longer meaningful ....the debate is no longer about
trade pure and simple, if it ever
was. The underlying issues have
always been: what will my
country produce, using the
domestic market as a base and
looking to export markets for
expansion? How many and what
kinds of (decent, well-paying)
jobs will these industries yield
for our citizens?..or what
industrial policy should we
pursue that best fits our human
and natural resources, our
opportunities and constraints?
-- Excerpted from Roy
Culpeper's Blog. Culpeper is a
Senior Fellow, School of
International Development and
Global Studies, University of
Ottawa, and a Fellow of the
Broadbent Institute.
http://www.broadbentinstitute.ca
/en/blog/industrial-policy-and-
free-trade The Broadbent Blog -
The hub for Canada’s leading
progressive voices.
T
“Mexico, the historical cradle of corn, has lost eighty percent of its corn varieties,” according to the report Seed Freedom, A Global Citizens Report. For more on
seeds freedom see the ten minute video with David Holmgren and
Vandana Shiva here: http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/20894-could-crowd-sourced-organic-seed-banks-
save-our-agricultural-future
15
Trade Advantage Replaced
by Rent Extraction
From Renegade Economist’s
Karl Fitzgerald’s interview
with Michael Hudson:
Karl: So that’s why trade
theory in comparative
advantage has really gone out
the window due to this
financialisation of the
economy?
Michael: Yes, if you have
three-quarters of the
American budget going for
housing, either rent or a
mortgage, and for debt
service and for taxes and
medical care, then you no
longer have the price of grain
or the price of bread
determining the price of
labour as it did in Ricardo’s
day. You have really a
financialisation of
everybody’s income and it’s
a rent theory of inter-national
trade instead of a cost of
production theory of inter-
national trade
competitiveness.
Photo: http://www.commonfrontiers.ca/
Fair Trade Manifesto
Actions You Can Take to Stop “Free trade” &
START Fair trade
Civil Society Action for a New
Focus, New Directions …. immediate changes must be
made to WTO policies in order
to provide countries more policy
space to pursue job-creation,
food security, sustainable
development, access to
affordable healthcare and
medicines, and global financial
stability. Many of these changes
are outlined in the WTO
Turnaround Statement of the
OWINFS (Our World is Not For
Sale) network, endorsed by over
245 organizations from more
than 105 countries.
The WTO Turnaround agenda
also points to another truth: in
the long run, a completely new
institution, with a central
mandate of setting trade rules
that promote sustainable
development while disciplining
corporate behavior, must be
created. (for more contact Deborah
Jones, Center for Economic and Policy
Research)
Tell Congress: Stand up for
Internet users' rights!
http://tinyurl.com/lmrs64c
Tell Congress: Make the text of
the Trans-Pacific Partnership
public and to block any proposal
for fast-track authorization.
http://bit.ly/15kw4NU
Stop the Secret Trade Deals: the
Monsanto Protection Act
on Steroids!
http://tinyurl.com/mgq25aj
Call Congress or write your own
message at:
http://www.contactingthecongress.org/
Kevin Zeese and Margaret
Flowers are urging activists to
come together and "stand in
solidarity [to] defeat these
agreements and end the era of
rigged corporate trade."
Read the Article
PETITION TO TRADING
NATIONS: Don't sacrifice our
rights, liberties and economic
independence to profit
corporations and monopolize
trade. Vote against joining the
Trans-Pacific Partnership now. http://consciouslifenews.com/wikileaks-tpp-revelations-show-refusing-negotiate-
trying-bully-countries-
unethical/1168736/ Click here to sign
-- it just takes a second
The World’s Workers
Call for Fair Trade
The ACTU – Australian Council of Trade Unions - is the peak union body representing 46 affiliated unions and the interests of almost 2 million workers across Australia. Unions support international
trade based on the principles of
fair trade. That is, trade which is
understood first and foremost as
a tool for raising living stan-
dards and creating decent job
opportunities… History has
demonstrated, however, that the
benefits of international trade
and investment are not evenly
distributed. Therefore, trade
negotiations need to be under-
pinned by a commitment to
human rights and decent work...
high-quality jobs and sustainable
economic development that
benefits all workers.
Also see the International
Labour Organization’s ILO
Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization
Monopolies and Free Trade
An Opinion Piece by Ole Lefmann
onopolies do not promote Free Trade. Henry George talked against monopolies when he spoke
about Free Trade. The Free Trade that George envisioned meant abolition of governmental
restrictions, taxes and tariffs that burdened producers and traders AND the abolition of
monopolies, except those that served public interests and these should be run as public monopolies, what
some people call socialization.
However while a number of his followers who pushed for Free Trade and the abolition of public
restrictions interference in private activities, they also wanted wider privatization in which they included
private monopolies. Their endeavours were supported by wealthy and influential businessmen, and
through the past 130 years they have been so successful that today monopolies have grown enormously
both in number and in magnitude, so now the economy is distorted to such a degree that millions of
people have no access to natural resources and suffer from lack of nutrition, drinkable water and shelter.
In their relentless pursuit of profits today’s conglomerates push for expansion of what they call
Free Trade rules that are in reality yielding greater inequality and lowering living conditions. It is no
wonder that the vast majority of victimized people now want to get rid of Free Trade.
Not everyone is able to keep up with the new internet based communications technologies and
thus they are not able follow the details of Free Trade agreements that the largely monopolized print
media outlets rarely discuss. They are often unaware that a person or organization promoting Free Trade
today will be viewed as firmly standing on the side of the monopolizers.
Mary Rawson of Vancouver, Canada is one of our long-time dedicated IU members who does
not use the internet. Mary has supported the IU by both personal services and economic donations.
Recently Mary sent a handwritten letter to me in which she referred to theIUview and the Minutes of a
recent Executive Committee Meeting that we sent to her by post. She expressed pleasure regarding the
nice newsletter and all the information contained in it as well as our meeting minutes.
In her letter Mary emphasized that her attitude to the name of the IU is today as it has always
been. She really likes that the name of the IU includes Free Trade and regrets that some members want to
take it away. She is well aware of the widespread public misunderstanding of the meaning of the words
Free Trade, but she would like us to use the misunderstanding as an opportunity to explain that the Free
Trade we urge for does not comprise or support private monopolies; to the contrary Free Trade means
Trade freed from taxes, tariffs, unnecessary public restrictions AND freed from the bad effects of private
monopolies.
Mary wants IU members to understand and proclaim: As long as and so much as society allows
the rent of land to be diverted to private hands, Free Trade will benefit least. The overriding issue is the
Land Question - in all its guises. “Stay on it!” she says.
I am of the opinion that the problem that pesters Georgists in connection with the word Free
Trade is based on the fact that Henry George thought that - with the exception of landownership - all
monopolies that the society would not abolish should be socialised. As George generally urged for a
public administration as slim as possible I suppose he felt that the number and magnitude of what I call
“un-abolishable monopolies” would be few. Today we have to realise that George’s proposal to socialize
these monopolies is not possible, they are so big that socialising them all would vehemently conflict with
the urge for a slim public administration. Therefore, today Georgists must find another solution to this
problem; otherwise it will continue to make people suspicious when some Georgists promote the
abolition of all monopolies which is unrealistic, or urge the socialisation of all monopolies which
strengthens the view that Georgists are in the category that includes Communists and Socialists.
If Georgists do not articulate a solution to this problem it means that they accept that Monopolies
collect a part of the Rent of Land, meaning that public collection of the rent of land would be only a
fraction of the full land rent. As long as Georgists do not propose a solution to the above mentioned
problem it means that Georgists are unreliable because their proposal cannot provide the “true” free trade
they so eagerly want to implement as part and parcel of economic justice.
M
17
I think that the problem of today’s monopolies can be solved by use of the same means as George
recommended regarding land ownership. My proposal will not raise any great problem. Public authorities
know the identities of all holders of publicly granted and protected monopolies; and assessors will not
have serious difficulties in assessing the value of monopolies with sufficient accuracy. The Government
would then decide the degree to which the monopolists shall pay to the public chest for holding the
publicly granted and protected monopolies. That is exactly the same procedure as Georgists recommend
for public collection of the rental values of land.
When the rents from all monopolies including land ownership are collected to the public purse
and used to benefit all citizens, and maybe by also distributing a portion in equal shares as a “citizen’s
dividend”, then nobody can use more than others except he/she delivers goods or services that on the free
market give the producer a reasonably income. The market would then function under the condition of
genuine free trade and will support development of a genuine democracy.
Citizen’S dividend
Citizen's dividend or social dividend is a proposed state policy based upon the principle that
the natural world is the common property of all persons (see Georgism). It is proposed that all
citizens receive regular payments (dividends) from revenue raised by the state through leasing or
selling natural resources for private use. In the United States, the idea can be traced back to
Thomas Paine's essay, Agrarian Justice,[1]
which is also considered one of the earliest proposals
for a social security system in the United States. Thomas Paine summarized his view by stating
that "Men did not make the earth. It is the value of the improvements only, and not the earth
itself, that is individual property. Every proprietor owes to the community a ground rent for the
land which he holds."
This concept is a form of basic income guarantee, where the Citizen's Dividend depends upon
the value of natural resources or what could be titled as "common goods" like location values,
seignorage, the electro-magnetic spectrum, the industrial use of air (CO production), etc.
The State of Alaska dispenses a form of citizen's dividend in its Permanent Fund Dividend,
which holds investments initially seeded by the state's revenue from mineral resources,
particularly petroleum. In 2005, every eligible Alaskan resident (including children) received a
check for $845.76. Over the 24-year history of the fund, it has paid out a total of $24,775.45 to
every resident.[2]
The concept is also promoted as a tool to reduce carbon emissions. [3]
Naturalfinance.net
proposes the funding source for social dividends to be the surplus of all state revenue over all
state program expenses. In this way, citizens are deeply interested to the alternative of any
government spending: increasing their cash dividend, and all spending
decisions affect every citizen equally. This from Wikipedia.
For more about Citizens’ Dividends go to The Progress Report for:
What Is the Citizen’s Dividend? Why Is It Just? Read Jeffery J.
Smith’s Earth Share Manifesto
Learn all about The Sky Trust, the world’s best hope for a genuine
Citizens Dividend (courtesy of The Progress Report) The photo is
of a portrait of Thomas Paine.
Dear Fellow IU Member,
I am writing to thank you for your continuing support and to thank our General Secretary Alanna Hartzok
and the IU Executive Committee (EC) for providing our organisation with fresh leadership and a renewed
sense of purpose.
However, I have to advise you that the use of the IU's full name - “The International Union for Land
Value Tax and Free Trade" - whilst being an accurate description of our objectives as expressed in our IU
constitution now acts as a barrier when contacting people who have never heard of Henry George or his
ideas. So much so, that the very future of our organisation is threatened by the continued use of our
existing name.
The modern use of the term "free trade" is not usually associated with the removal of duties and tariff
barriers on international trade but is more closely associated with the privatisation of water, energy,
public transport, and corporate dominated globalization. Consequently the IU’s EC is considering to
change our name in order to better equip us to work more effectively for the world-wide adoption of the
ideals we all strive for.
The IU is now about to consult our membership on a possible alternative title that has been agreed by
your EC: "The International Union for Economic Justice" I believe this proposed title has
considerable merit.
1. How can TheIU possibly work effectively if our very name shouts the solution, before the people
we are addressing have clearly understood the problem?
2. Many members have been dissatisfied with the IU's current name over many years but at many
previous conferences this has failed to be resolved with the necessary two-thirds majority.
3. If we are to become a serious think-tank, advising and serving governments and others around the
world, we need to be able to present ourselves on our website, letterhead and business cards as an
organisation that is researching the causes of the problem - not wearing the answer on our sleeve.
4. The solution we seek is not just Land Value Tax but the collection of all unearned rents for the
benefit of the public purse.
5. In practice, for many years now the IU has allowed members and officers to shorten its name to
"The international Union for Land Value Tax" or even just "TheIU".
6. Hopefully, we can all unite around the need for "economic justice"?
TheIU Executive wants to hear your views so do respond by email or letter to Alanna Hartzok at
[email protected] Our recent successes have been to organise an excellent IU Conference,
publish books, commission and partake in four recent films and send speakers to address international
conferences organised by the UN, World Bank and other organisations. As our funds are now being
rapidly depleted one of our immediate priorities is to fundraise so that we can commission more books
and films, support initiatives around the world and enhance our ability to lobby governments and attend
conferences. If you wish to support this effort please use our website (www.theIU.org) to make a
donation to the IU via PayPal or send a cheque (payable to The IU) to Tommas Graves, 73 Fairfax
Road. Teddington. TW11 9DA. UK. All the best to you from Dave Wetzel.
A Message to Our Members from IU President Dave Wetzel