1. Hierarchy of monopolies
   1. Money
   2. Land
   3. Tariffs
   4. Patents
2. Libertarian views of land
   1. Non-proviso Lockean
      1. Anarcho-capitalists
      2. Original appropriation creates perpetual property right
      3. Rent would not be a problem if all state owned land were homesteadable.
      4. Some places (countries conquered and run under latifundia) may require some kind of one off redistribution of historically dubiously acquired land.
      5. Land indistinguishable from other types of property.
      6. A properly free market will solve any other problems related to scarcity
      7. But propty owners are not entitled to the value of their property, just its utility
      8. Criticisms
         1. Does not recognise the fundamental importance of rent in exploitation
   2. Proviso Lockean
      1. Georgists
         1. Henry George himself
         2. Albert Jay Nock
         3. Frank Chodorov?
         4. UK Liberal Party
            1. Lloyd George
            2. Churchill
            3. JS Mill
      2. Original appropriation (mixing one's labour) creates property right
         1. BUT: "leaving as much, and as good, for others" So called Lockean Proviso (Robert Nozick)
      3. Land belongs to mankind in common
      4. Rent arises only when Lockean Proviso is broken - I.e when more people want to be in a particular place than there is additional land available for them
      5. Rent therefore is created by the "community" through agglomeration and should be collected by that community.
      6. Rent is also created because of infrastructure spending. Therefore collected rent should finance such public goods or, if these are privately provided, returned as citizen's dividend.
      7. Criticisms
         1. Essentially denies private property
         2. Rothbardians dismiss it as communism because of fundamental importance of land as the first appropriated scarce good
   3. Possession and use
      1. Individualist anarchists/mutualists
         1. Pierre Joseph Proudhon
         2. Benjamin Tucker
      2. Absentee landlordism creates unfair rent and is inherently a state created privilege.
      3. Absent this state privilege rent would all but disappear, except for rent caused by advantages such as soil fertility
      4. Access to cheap capital once the money monopoly was abolished would also reduce rent to around the cost of "free money"
      5. Real property becomes abandoned when owner no longer occupies it.
      6. Criticisms
         1. Rothbardians say that "abandonment" by not occupying land could be applied to other property and makes this a thieve's charter.
         2. Georgists say that it still does not recognise rent's all pervasive nature.
3. Rent
   1. Where does it come from?
      1. Land attracts rent as soon as it is scarce. When there are more people needing land than is available and homesteadable within the "margin of production".
      2. BUT the "margin of production" also approximates the extent of agglomeration benefits. So everyone inside that area "benefits" each other.
         1. Thus scarcity of land is actually necessary under division of labour
      3. Infrastructure also creates rent, unless the costs of the infrastructure are fully recovered separately e.g. Through user fees etc.
   2. Is it a bad thing?
   3. Options for rent recovery