Change Your Image
wyn-15
Reviews
Capital in the Twenty-First Century (2019)
So Much of so-called Capital is Land
There is a lot of important thought in this film, but it misses an entire, and important, chapter in the history of economic thought that provides clearer answers and actual solutions.
Early in the film, there is a great deal of talk about land. In classical economics, it was recognized that there are not two but three factors of production, LAND, LABOR and CAPITAL. The neoclassical economists, from whom almost all of today's college and university instructors learned their economics, somehow managed to treat LAND as if it is merely a subset of CAPITAL.
But LAND and CAPITAL are vastly different. LAND includes all the the natural creation -- the sites under our feet on which we live and work, the natural resources we draw from the earth,. the electromagnetic spectrum, geosynchronous orbits. LABOR uses those things to supply its wants and needs. Thrifty laborers can use their excess to create better and better tools that make LABOR more productive. That's CAPITAL.
But under it all is LAND. And if you think land is trivial today, consider that a single block in midtown Manhattan can be worth $250 million, $500 million or more. An acre of good farmland might be worth $2,500. It would take 100,000 acres of that farmland to equal the value of that single $250 million acre in Manhattan. And then we let them call it "CAPITAL"
Land was here before people were, and we're all equally entitled to share in its value. That's the chapter of the history of economic thought that most of the presenters in this film seem to have missed.
The names most clearly associated with it are Adam Smith, David Ricardo, John Stuart Mill and Henry George. Today, the people who know these ideas are often known as Georgists. Their thought has answers from which this film, and all of us, would benefit.
The End of Poverty? (2008)
Connecting the Dots
One of the strengths of this film in my eyes is that it highlights the connections among poverty, privilege, access to natural resources (including but not limited to land itself), joblessness, low wages and terrorism, and touches at least briefly on the fact that a relative few of us are consuming a hugely disproportionate share of the world's natural resources, thereby depriving others of their equal right to these resources, and depriving future generations.
Most people tend to think of these problems as intractable, and therefore devote themselves to charitable attempts to ameliorate their effects.
Poverty is a function of how we structure the world's economy -- what we permit to be privatized, and what we treat as common property. Most countries, including the US, permit the privatization of the economic value of natural resources (Alaska being perhaps an exception) and land value, and then socialize wages and tax sales.
The foundation which financed this production (Schalkenbach) comes from a different point of view. It was founded in the 1920s to promote the ideas of Henry George (b. Philadelphia, 1839; d. NYC, 1897), the author of "Progress and Poverty," the best-selling book ever on political economy, which, incidentally, comes from the same question as the film: "with so much wealth in the world, why is there still so much poverty?" To learn more about views of George's ideas, search on "quotable notables," "poverty think again" and "why global poverty." Look for his speeches, including "The Crime of Poverty." Like George's thought, TEOP? doesn't blame poverty's victims; it seeks to understand the systematic, structural aspects of poverty.
The film itself only hints at George's ideas (mostly in the interviews with Clifford Cobb) and seems to me to be designed to open our minds to asking better questions about poverty's causes. I found it rather effective. It is beautifully photographed, includes some memorable music and visual images, and makes effective use of legible subtitles for most of the speakers whose words or accents I had difficulty understanding; I liked that I could listen to their voices and intonation, rather than hearing a translator drowning them out.
Henry David Thoreau said "There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root." The widely-discussed "solutions" to poverty -- micro-credit, malaria nets, small-scale clean water devices, general education, etc. -- nibble at the leaves of poverty. Henry George's ideas go to the root of the problem, and show us how to eradicate it. I hope this film will ultimately lead more people to ask the right questions and discover that root for themselves, and then, switching metaphors, to connect the dots and strike at the root, illuminated by George's insights to guide policy.
We CAN end poverty, but not in the ways we're currently going about it. We can also create a sustainable economy and environment.