To be a land lord you'd have to have earned the money to purchase the land. Not every landlord illegally acquired the land or bought it with money stolen from his oppressed factory workers. Usually the land lord earned the land by toiling his time away for the money to buy that land. Respect that. You'd be in the same shoes as the landlord if you worked hard for the land.
@@davidfereira5354 Yes, in that very specific scenario, there is nobility in the purchase. However, in the long term, the negative side of the land ownership cycle will come back for that land. Whether because the person who inherits it wants to maximize profit off of it or sells it to an indecent landlord, or if it gets sold enough to pay debt or for a major medical expense or if the owner dies with no heir etc etc etc. Eventually..it won't be so honorable.
@@davidfereira5354 this is the myth that landlords want to perpetuate. It's the myth of the meritocracy. Owning someone else's basic human right and then renting that back to them is inherently unjust. I don't understand why this is so difficult to understand, I really don't.
I've never played those rules but I can't understand how you couldn't play those rules on a modern board, other than name changes, what are the differences?
where can i find these alternate rules, in full, because tracking down a diagram of the original board is now easier than ever, all one needs do is transcribe said diagram onto a printable playmat and youve got a 1906 monopoly board, but its useless without the rules
@@bkane573 Did... Someone deleted a message or when did we start talking about Communism? Cause... Henry George wasn't a commie (he didn't like Marx) and Capitalism wasn't born to defeat communism. It's about defeating mercantilism (communism was made to supplant capitalism but everyone saw that was bit too optimistic). So... Yeah, not every critique to capitalism is made by commies and capitalism isn't the solution to communism, but the predecessor. So... No need to fight the red ghost, chill. And I say that as a honest capitalist
@@bkane573 monopoly is a capitalist game that shows how eventually everything is owned by 1 person. Nowhere is communism brought up but because you think the world is black and white you assume because it’s anti capitalism it must be pro communism.
@@d.esanchez3351 No deleted messages, just someone who may or may not spend alot of time with the college crowd that likes to paint communism as the "system to save us all." Personal I believe all our current system's have flaws, but I'm in no position to make a better one, so I'll stick with capitalism and the second amendment.
Yes, true. It's like that South Park episode where the whole town doesn't have internet, and all the help operator says is: "How can we help you have internet... if you don't have the internet?" "How can we give you more of our wealth... when I can just find someone else who will work for less?" ...And then the quality of life, product, and service deteriorates. Typically because the rich guy, who's already rich, decides to value saving money above all else.
That’s why we need to go bring back the 1950s-1960s era of business regulations and tax levels. Especially, the ones that were erased in the late 1970s to late 1980s deregulation era. The people who voted in Mulroney, Reagan, and Thatcher back then have made billions. All while, non-executive, workers’ wages have decreased in value compared to inflation, nearly every year since then.
@@cjwrench07 I like how, even though people like Thatcher and Reagan were voted in by hundreds of millions of people, those on the left still talk like it was just 150 corporate executives voting against literally everyone else. You don't need to be a billionaire to benefit from deregulation and lower taxes. By the way, net taxation vs GDP today is double what it was in the 50s, and back then they were spending most of the budget on building nuclear missiles. It's hilarious that people think the 50s were a time of strict oversight and robust social programs, just because they saw an income tax bracket. As if billionaires get biweekly paychecks.
John Stuart Mill also was very anti-rent. He thought that income from rent (subtracting improvements and maintenance) should be taxed at 99%. Really discourage people from hoarding land *cough* Black rock *cough*
Well, sure, but then no one would ever rent out property, and you would be unable to get an apartment. It might be a bit cheaper to get a house, but not cheap enough! That being said, you can crack down on BlackRock without fucking over normal middle-class landowners.
it helped that the original didn't have hotels. There weren't enough houses to go around. if they were all in use, you had to wait until someone was forced to sell one.
same now: monopoly has 32 houses and 12 hotels. While there are several strategies you can use to try to win the game, house control is significant in all of them. The single best strategy advice I can give (after having played tens of thousands of games online over a decade): Never upgrade houses to hotels.
@@SuperPhexx If no other houses are available and you want to put them onto another property, you can upgrade houses to hotels. Just don't let other players get a hold of your houses for free.
When my family plays monopoly, all the tax and fee money goes into the middle of the board and who ever lands on the Free square in the corner gets the money. I didn't find out until I was 15 that wasn't an actual rule for the game, but whenever I play I insist this rule is in the game XD It's also fun to play Monopoly with teenage boys cause there's the added rule that you can steal money from the middle and bank. If you aren't caught then you keep it, and if you are caught your thrown in jail for a while. It's also fun to "break out" of jail which follows the same rules, just if your caught you are "executed" aka evicted from the game and all your money and assets are seized by the Free slot.
@@deborahedwards1457 yayyyyyy someone else who plays! When I found out it wasn’t an actual rule people looked at me funny when I said it was how we played
@@siaorihara house rules! We once went on the official Monopoly bus and took part in a competion... Win a vintage board set... And asked admit the free parking space being used for tax free money and payments and they said... It's a house rule... So legit of everyone agrees before the game starts.
@@deborahedwards1457 lmao 🤣 that’s awesome!!! Normally I’d play only with my family when I was a kid(and my parents think it’s boring cause it’s “never ending”(we play until the bank runs out of money and the economy collapses cause I didn’t know the card monopoly rule until I was literally 15)) and then my brother had a couple of friends play a few times where we got the robbing and jail break rules. Now I basically can only play with my friends who half of them are under 10 so they don’t understand how to actually play 😭
@@siaorihara I'm definitely going to try the bank robbing addition next time we play... It sounds right up our street! You should play with your younger friends and teach them the ways of house rules... In a few years they will be awesome opponents!
@@alandominguez6346bro what? We slaughtered the natives, stole their foods, raped their women and children, and forced them to teach us things, until those that were in close proximity to the colonizers died of disease. Never had communism truly been tried in a large scale government. Never. Idc what China calls themselves or what other countries say they were or are; humans have had communistic oligarchies and communistic dictatorships, but the closest to true communism was many of the Native American tribes as well as different native tribes of other regions. But as colonizers wiped them out and erased them from history and branded them “savages,” people seem to refuse to acknowledge that the way of life they had worked wonderfully for them for tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of years.
Henry George wrote in his economic treatise Progress and Poverty that he did not propose either buying or confiscating private land, arguing that it was only necessary to confiscate rent.
I’d say that’s worse than confiscating the land cause now the owner still has to pay for maintenance and utilities but no longer has the rent to do so making rental properties a guaranteed path to bankruptcy
@@Ebolson1019 It doesn't matter what you think it sounds like. It was a "Single Tax" on undeveloped land value. Under contemporary systems, they didn't make capital improvements to avoid tax increases. Sometimes in my city instead of developing high value land they leave it as a flat parking lot. Unger a Georgist land value tax, there's no incentive to hoard high demand land and leave it go to waste, because you don't pay any taxes on capital improvements. Raw land is not capital. There is no rent confiscation, but rather taxes are assessed only based on raw land value.
The matter of how the game's rules and message were corrupted is unfortunate, but George never had a problem with people making money from their inventions and products. He specifically had a problem with unearned rents.
Funny, there’s one rule I remember from a while back (probably a house rule) in that if you get fined, you pay it to “the pot” instead of the bank, and you’d get the whole pot if you landed on the parking space.
In the revised (capitalist version), all of the "tax" mechanics are supposed to go to the center and be forever unobtainable by the players because that's how they view taxes. If something says you pay another player or the bank, however, that money can be recouped later.
It makes the game worse for the exact reason it is a better economic system, because it is far more fair. It makes it extremely hard to lose, which means the game never ends.
@@decgal81 it can be played in less than 3 hours very easily without house rules or constantly reminding people to do their turn. If it takes longer than that you are doing something wrong or extremely unlucky.
@@gabemerritt3139 but in the cooperative version of the game you arent playing against each other, youre playing against the bank, aka the billionare, or in the case of 1906 millionare, class, and bettering ourselves while doing so.
Fun fact: there's a theory that while Lizzie Magie may have "invented" monopoly, the concept of it was already around and played in different ways by different people
Naw that ain't communist, communism doesn't believe in anyone owning land (it'd be communal, hence communism). What you're thinking about is a tax system that actually works for the people instead of enriching corrupt politicians. But it is very telling (and concerning) that your schooling tried to pass fair taxes off as communism.
Henry George and Karl Marx didn't see eye to eye. Henry George wanted a single tax system to make a more humane economy. Marx wanted revolutiony socialism because the French terror state sounded cool. Back then, American socialists voted for Henry George, but today, most people who say Socialism are talking about Marx's blood in the streets communism. That's kind of bad.
My grandparents had a "Wheeler-Dealer" version that included a system for investing in the stock market. There were 10 or so commodities you could invest in at the beginning of your turn and your roll determined the payout. There was a huge graph. One of the commodities was super safe and had low rates, but one of them had high rates but only paid out if you rolled a 2 or 12.* *just looked up the game online and it's actually 11 or 12, giving you a 1 in 12 chance vs a 1 in 18 chance
@@johnspence8141 careful, that's both racist and elitist to make that sort of criticism. Not very progressive of you... But no, let's skip right to the USSR and Mao.
@@beishtkione24 What does that have to do with the USSR and Mao? That version of the game doesn't even qualify as socialism and you're pretending that it's teaching Leninism.
For clarity, Georgist taxes tax the *unimproved* value of the land. So if you build a big hotel or house on the land that makes the lot more valuable, you still only get taxed on the value of the land as a bare dirt lot. This is important, because it means that the tax falls *only* on the thing you can't make more of (the land itself) and not on the productive things you're doing with it. This matters because when you tax things you get less of them. Most taxes serve to depress useful economic activity. With land, this isn't a problem, because you can't make more land anyway, you can only use it more efficiently. This allows the taxes to fall specifically on the parts of land ownership that are purely extractive. If most of your business is doing valuable things with the land, the tax is just a small nuisance. It only becomes a problem if literally all you're doing is sitting around extracting rents without doing anything of value in return. *Those* gains are mostly captured by the public.
Henry George was not an anti-capitalist, he was a supporter of capitalism with the exception that land should be taxed in accordance to the value of that land.
Basic rule changes for anyone interested in playing. They’re called “Prosperity” rules. 1. When you land on a space, pay the base rent to the prosperity fund. IF there is any improvement on the lot, the landlord is given the extra rent money for the improvement. 2. The prosperity fund should be used to buy utilities ASAP. I don’t actually see any rules about wage increase, but maybe you could homebrew something. 3. When ALL players have at least doubled their initial money, the game is won. I’m skipping over some rules for simplicity, and because some of them interact with other rules and spaces that aren’t in modern monopoly.
georgism isn't anti-capitalist, it's actually much more libertarian than what we have now in the us at least. George said that land value tax should be the only tax, the libertarian argument for this is that the governments main job is to protect private property and defend the nation both internally and externally, so the only people paying the government should be people who own land because taxation without compensation is theft.
If these people were alive today they would probably have adjusted perspectives. Back then there was less focus on schooling and healthcare, both tremendously vital systems that also happen to be very expensive With a land tax only you would have a very hard time both allowing housing to be affordable for families without avoiding landlords, and also providing necessary systems for the world to function
@@puppieslovies The government cannot and should not attempt to control the economy. The government is good at one thing and one thing only and that is being a big gun. There's nothing wrong with the government being a big gun as long as it's used right, for national defense, justice, and law enforcement. The reason housing is so expensive in certain areas is because of government control and regulation, when certain apartment buildings are subsidized and others are highly taxed it becomes impossible for competition to decrease price and increase quality in exchange for more overall tenants. In terms of schooling there is a reason private and charter schools perform better even with lower budgets, it's because there is actually incentive to be better so parents choose to send their kids there. If there was one restaurant for everyone in a given area they would have no incentive to serve good food. Socialist ideas are nothing new, we may call them a different name or promote them for different reasons but in function they are the same as cronyism and mercantilism and feudalism. It has continually been proven that the government is incapable of justly providing welfare for a population; they may promote it, as stated in the preamble, but that means protecting the peoples right to economic freedom.
@@videodord the government not doing anything about the economy leads to 19th century monopolies which themselves are hugely anticompetitive and bring suffering to millions of people
@@puppieslovies Substantial monopolies are created by government regulation and subsidization, which George was vehemently against. Corporations working with the government is not the free market it's cronyism. Monopolies in a free market are always temporary and most often lead to the complete demise of the companies who hold them. Complete control of the market leads companies with monopolies to stop innovating and striving for more customers, so small companies are given the opportunity to easily provide the better or more advanced product and completely destroy the monopoly. IBM had a complete monopoly of the computer industry, causing hundreds of small startups to provide the cheaper, smaller, personal computers in the 80s and 90s. Nokia was seen as a monopoly over the mobile phone market, which caused the creation of the smartphone as its competitors were forced to innovate and create a new product.
What I like about modern monopoly is that it proves that... Even if everyone starts with the same possibilities. Some, like my father, don't really care too much, and thus won't get much. Some, like me, will care and try to win but sometimes the system doesn't provide the opportunities and hard work proves a limited advantage. And then is people like my sister, not just good at making business and admin money but also lucky AF and will simply crush everyone.
We have a version of this in my house rules. And “tax” or hospital fees or whatever go in the middle, and you get the pot when you land on free parking, sort of like winning the lottery.
No, the REAL Monopoly board has streets from Atlantic City, NJ, which my family spent an afternoon biking through, before going off to dinner and the Apollo 11 Moon Landing on TV. All others are frauds.
Actually you can hold the land in common. It's literally just a matter tearing down the fences and bringing it into public ownership. Like, the land was enclosed through violence and it is kept enclosed only through the threat and deployment of further violence. Construction companies demolish old buildings to build new ones all the time. The land can and should be reclaimed.
Well I didn't use any violence to acquire my land. Way, way back, maybe. But I had nothing to do with that. So, if you or your family own any land at all, you'd be fine with the state forcibly taking it?
@@peterwallis4288 If you have exorbitant amounts of land where it is scarce, then yes, that is how you acquired it, even if that fact is obscured to you by the fact that the state, laws, social norms, does it for you now rather than you in a cowboy hat and a gun (or some other period-appropriate equivalent) like em really old days.
Fun and realistic house rules for monopoly: 1. Any time a player pays for anything, they can choose to pay an extra 1, 5, or 10 dollars. If they do, they may roll the dice three times. If at least two rolls land on doubles, they may claim up to 1,000 dollars from the money in the center of the board. If three consecutive rolls land on doubles, they may claim all of it instead. 2. The bank is a player. The bank doesn't pay rent on mortgaged properties. The bank begins the game with three monopolies, or twelve properties, of their choice and 500 dollars. If you land on a property owned by the bank, after you pay rent, you have the option to claim that property under mortgage. Players will pay 50% rent on mortgaged properties. When you pass Go, you must pay 100 dollars to the bank for each mortgaged property you own. Players cannot unmortgage normally, instead, when you have paid to the bank the full cost of the property + 10 dollars for each turn that has passed since you claimed it, it becomes unmortgaged. If the bank purchases houses or hotels, they are counted in the cost of rent and the price to unmortgage. If the bank ever goes bankrupt (ha), they may claim up to 3,000 dollars from the center of the board. 3. Players do not get money for passing Go (no universal basic income). Instead they may pay any amount of money as they pass. For each 100 dollars paid this way, the next time that player lands on a "tax" tile or draws a card that causes taxes to be paid, they may instead take an extra turn. This is cumulative. 4. Players with more than 2,250 dollars may pay 25 dollars instead of going to jail. 5. Players with more than 3,000 dollars may refuse to go to jail.
She forgot the part where bankers and corrupt politicians siphon off the “community” money. And why would anyone buy property or build anything on it in the first place if they’re just going to have to pay all the profits in taxes? Plus, if you instituted these rules in Monopoly, you’ve made a game that was already 3+ hours long into a 3+ day long game.
Why does the most sane compassionate answer only exist in a board game meanwhile we are making autonomous AI with kill-authorization to get a percentage more oil, gas, land, and [ insert combination of protons neutrons and electrons here ].
Because Henry George wasn't elected for mayor, then he died. So all the American socialist types embraced Marxist communism, and that made the next century jam-packed with atrocities. Meanwhile, Americans don't understand that voting for politicians doesn't make democracy, it makes oligarchy, in which only the most crooked cronies (Biden, Bush, Clinton) or the most charismatic Demagogues (Trump, Obama) rise to power, but the citizens are disenfranchised. (look up video of Obama drinking tap water in Flint, Michigan) The issue is majority rule political systems serve power, not the people. Dissidents talk about communism, or revolutionary socialism, but that also serves power and kills more people. Sane and compassionate ideas get shut down. That said, you can get yourself a copy of Henry George's Poverty and Progress, which was written before tge board game.
@@creepbg It's ironic that you tried to project your Babeuf-alignment onto me. You don't need a revolution anyway, status-quo corporatism has already delivered your kill-bots, and the capitalist mode of production with make them affordable before any socialist revolutionary movement is possible... Unless you're eager for Lada or Yugo quality bots under totalitarian revolutionary socialist economics.
@@captainl-ron4068 Hernry George was not a communist and he did not support Marx's socialism. Marx wanted to abolish private property, not tax land speculators and hoarders. If you think that's communism, then I don't think you've read the American founding fathers.
@@MikeHunt-zy3cn Why wouldn't that translate to the real world? Of course the board game is overly simplistic, because it's only supposed to be an overview of the ideology and if you really want to learn about how to implement it or about the details of the ideology, then you have to read the books. The ideology itself could be implemented without any real problems though.
Probably the most important rule change, which arguably is just better than normal monopoly, is that once you've gone around the board enough times (5 from memory, could be 3 I'm not entirely sure) you're done. Whoever is richest at the end wins. There's no endgame where both remaining players just breeze through turns waiting for someone to get a bad chance card or land on a hotel 1 too many times.
@@danielcrafter9349Because Jabber conflates markets (a natural concept which many other animals have) with capitalism, a social construct created by humans.
The modern Monopoly game was actually stolen by a guy in PA, and I know his grandsons… They claim their grandfather was the inventor of the game, but there are historical clues that he did in fact steal it as the game was documented as being played long before he “invented” the game! It was in fact “stolen”! And the original creators never got any credits from Monopoly proceeds!
AIUI the game was kind of boring because it never ended. Maybe add a time limit to both games where the goal is to avoid bankruptcy for X number of turns, not to drive other players bankrupt?
Monopoly is a very tense board game. I remember when I was a young schoolboy, playing it with the family. It turned into arguments and tantrums. I never forget it. It brought the worst and dark side of participants personalities, I would say.
Georgism is NOT socialism. Henry George wanted to replace essentially ALL taxes with a single land value tax. A factory owner would have to pay taxes on the unimproved value of the land the factory is on no matter how much they earned, but otherwise all the profits they made would be taxed at 0%. If they invested that profit into the stock market and made capital gains they'd still be taxed at 0%. If they transferred their vast wealth to their children after death, they wouldn't pay an inheritance tax and so on.
There isn't socialism here. The dude was a capitalist. He just believed the only real taxes should be from land ownership to prevent monopolies on said land.
Look at you on your phone that was developed by capitalism, using internet that is being served to you by capitalism, wearing capitalist clothes, in your capitalist home eating capitalist food. How about you get out there and be the change you want to see instead of bitching about someone else needs to start the commune
@@MikeHunt-zy3cn landlordism is a large part of capitalism. If you criticize landlordism, then you're criticising the ideology of a lot of capitalists.
Henry George's ideas inspired a Danish political party named "Retsforbundet" (the Justice associstion), they were the 5th largest in Copenhagen in the 1930s, but lost national votes after their first participation in Government . Yet for decades, the municipal tax on land carried their term for the Georgian concept .
If you play the game to its conclusion under these rules, the government has all of the property, and all of the money. You might argue that "isn't real communism", but it's how every attempt at communism has ended up.
I think we can all be certain that a channel such as yours that is immersed in little more than vacuous video games, probably doesn't know what the word Socialism actually means - spoon fed by sociopathic manipulators as so many people are... Stick to your polygons, little one.
This really makes sense of the pass go rule. I never really got that, it seemed a little pointless considering you only got 200 and you’d likely be setting up far more just by buying property in between go. But knowing it’s actually supposed to be a wage is cool
A couple years ago someone did a limited reprint run of the original landlords game. I have a copy, and it's awesome. It is an economic lesson in a game, which was the entire point. If my mom were still teaching high school economics, she would have borrowed that in an instant.
Fun little fact I like to share when I can, my home town is a single tax colony founded on Henry George's ideas, some of the original squares were streets in my town.
Land value tax in place of property, income, payroll and sales tax does a much better job of preserving a free market. Property tax punishes improvement and rewards neglect. Income and payroll taxes punish cooperation and paying higher wages. Sales tax is famously regressive, hurting the poor, and it punishes cooperation. Land-value tax punishes unproductive land use like urban parking lots, but it doesn't rely on government bodies to determine what a "good" or "productive" land use is for each lot. It's not partial to commercial, residential, industrial or agricultural land use provided that environmental destruction and nonrenewable resource extraction fees are still paid to the insured party (or the public as the case may be).
Maybe we can do a modern version where because of immigration demand for houses always outstrips the available houses and costs go up until demand is reduced. There are a LOT of people who could stand to learn that lesson.
We put all tax and fines collected in the centre of the board and whoever lands on "Free Parking" gets the lot. We also had 400 for landing on "Go" because you pass it over two throws. The problem is though, if you start out with 1500 it isn't much like real life for most of us.
My mum taught me similar rules. Everytime someone pays tax, it goes in the middle of the board. When someone lands on Free Parkng, that pot is shared equally between all players.
The original game was anti-monopoly not anti-capitalist. George didn't advocate holding land in common. He advocated taxing unimproved value of land. The idea was the tax was efficient because it didn't change behavior. As George wrote if you tax the trees on the land, people will cut down the trees and grow less on it. If you tax the land you can't avoid the tax. So the tax didn't distort economic decisions. He warned too high of a tax would cause negative land prices. So it wasn't really an idea of communal ownership. My understanding is the game intended to reward wealth creation. However the second set of rules was to create monopolies and crush others. The point was against monopolies and for competition.
There is a common house rule (in the US) ; you are to place any taxes paid in the middle of the board and is taken by the next person to land on the Free Parking space.
The issue is the treasury pot would never be doled out to players who pass go in real life, it would just go into politicians pocket’s while they claim it goes to “researching if pigs can fly at Oxford university”
Henry George wasn't anti-capitalist. He just wanted the rents of natural resources (land) to go to the public through land-value tax. In fact he was pro free trade
henry george was based, there are several countries that have implemented some form of LVT and it's worked out really well for basically all of them: singapore, new zealand, china
A brief aside too: Georgism is held in high regard among Marxists, Keynesians and Austrian libertarians alike. It's perhaps the piece of macroeconomics that attracts the most bipartisan support.
My partner and I did the monopoly board as our first "official" date. We Spent all day travelling around London to take photos of each other beside the road (& rail) signs for each square on the board! Was an amazing day!
My family use something like that and we call it the kitty, which was for the winner of the free parking, which is made from the community cards that cost u and from bail and sometimes it made or broke the game and or who ever is winning at the time lol
I wish youd call her what she was, a Communist. She was rightfully critiquing the objective villainy of capitalism and showcasing the dangers of the exact system that now is ruining every aspect of everyone’s livew
She wasn't a communist you fool. She was proselytizing the ideas of Henry George. Which was the only real tax should be a land tax to prevent monopolies on land ownership. Did you listen to the video?
![The Anti-Capitalist Rules of the Original Monopoly Board Game [Shorts]](/img/logo.svg){kind=logo}
