Could Hitler Have Successfully Adopted a Wholesale Land Value Tax?

We all know how collecting the economic rents for public revenue is an impossible policy to adopt.

Because a democratic majority of people want to reserve the right to legally rob their neighbours, on a system wide basis. And this is the sole reason why we have the most unjust social institution one could ever invent - called taxation.

And Land Value 'Taxation' which is the well known policy used to collect the rents, its a tax in name only, has been in the manifestos of the Green, the Labour and the Liberal Democrat party's of the UK for decades. 

All of them understand LVT's superior benefits technically. All of them are acutely aware they will be unelectable for 20 years if they attempt to adopt it. Because the democratic majority are homeowners or aspire to be a homeowner one day, for the large unearned incomes they know they will get from owning and opposing such a policy. It's way more fruitful to be a rent seeker than to use earned incomes from doing work or using savings to invest into capital formation. 

So when you're told we live in a capitalist society, laugh in their faces. We live in a rentier society plain and true. Even Marx was horrified when he discovered this and went on to intensify his campaign against capital in spite of now knowing it was a lie, much like the 3 out of 4 major UK political party's above still do today. 

When a homeowner is first presented with this reality, to escape from it, the first thing they always say, rest assured, will be: "but its my home too, surely I must have a place to live". The simple reply to this attempted escape is "so if that enormous tax free and work free unearned income is such a burden to you, give it all to me and your problem is solved. You're welcome!". This attempt to escape is the same attitude we've heard from Marx, Greenery, the DEI party and the Fiberals just in different form. It is latent party policy which all agree on in perfect harmony.

To mitigate the devastating economic and social consequences of our free choice here, taxation must be done. We all insist on robbing each other as a primary economic and social function and have demanded it be made legal and kept that way at all costs. The people themselves have made the most fundamental part of any economy - a systemic injustice, legal. 

Now then. Find a quiet moment, a comfy place to sit and take a deep breath before consideration of the following: consider the time when Hitler was at the height of his power in the mid 30's, could he have managed to adopt Land Value Taxation? 

It was a democracy technically. He was a socialist as were all the new institutions he used to control it all. The people were contented to allow him to proceed with the genocide. He had enough power. So the people loved him enough to allow an LVT, the most difficult of all policies, to proceed. Right?

Or did they still not love him enough?

Think about it, with extreme care. I know you will not bother though. As a homeowner you will see the idea as terroristic. And what does this mean in the context of Hitler and the people of that nation at the time?

Incidentally I do not support an LVT. Its adoption is a worse alternative. If the people of the world loved their descendants even a little bit more, there would be no need for the policy already. Until then I will remain an authentic rent seeker because that is the best form of tax planning and looking after the household. Until then, any superficial reform such as land or money, is a sin - to miss the mark. 

At the Systemic Fiscal Reform Group, a Cambridge UK based economics think tank, have an alternative policy proposal called Location Value Covenants, which has the same effect as LVT. The only differences being 

1. the homeowner volunteers their freebies in exchange for less debt or less taxation
2. it mitigates the probability of collapsing the financial system because it is adopted asynchronously by individuals and theres no risk of fear causing a banking contagion. Banking can be left to its own devices like any other free enterprise - if they do not compete, they fail. Eventually with mortgages no longer required to finance a home, banks have no more power to encourage corruption than the local coffee shop or a space faring entrepreneur.
3. 
   

Curiously, the movement for reform using LVT called Georgism objected most intensely to LVC's. More so than bankers, politicians and oligarchs.