The financial collapse has two definable causes.

#1, A distinct lack of governing regulations, which in effect allowed the lowest forms of life and greed is good to foul share markets, which once were places that traded shares which when first introduced were just something to share the risk and subsequent returns.

#2 the concentration of too much of our finite wealth in too few hands. No hugely misrepresented mathematical equation is able to paint over any of that.

The only way to prevent history repeating itself is simple a better and fairer, more equitable wealth distribution between those who risk capital and those whose bent backs/racked brains create the all actual wealth!

As one might see in genuine cooperative enterprise.(share holding workers)

Of course there should be root and branch tax reform, rather than the hot air and fathomless talk and fiddling at the edges, that has replaced it; and absolutely counterproductive manic absolutism, just to shift liability for the have to the have nots, rather than introduce real reform.

We have a chance to turbo charge our economy, and just by the simple expediency of utilizing a massively under utilized multiplier factor and its handmaiden, resultant massively improved discretionary spending.

Just get real about tax reform, and introduce something that no multinational, [some with bigger budgets than sovereign nations,] can actually avoid, namely an entirely unavoidable stand alone expenditure tax, which just taxes all income equally at say a flat 19%.

And given that is done, return the averaged 7% of the bottom line that is ripped out by current tax compliance costs!

And take the 7% savings away from the 19% tax rate and hey presto, a real rate of just 12% tops, no ifs buts or maybes!

And indeed no reason to waste time better spent, fudge the books or hide income under the mattress.

Thinking within a fixed circle of ideas, limits the questions and indeed any and all possible solutions!

Indeed one needs to understand the problem and its causes before a viable solution can be worked out and implemented!
Rhrosty.

I agree we should shift more of the tax burden onto land. However it has little to do with the financial collapse. That was caused by banks making bad loans, then exacerbated by governments trying to balance their budgets at a time in the economic cycle when the responsible course of action would have been to stimulate the economy by running much bigger deficits.

It was once postulated that land was the basis of all wealth! And just antiquated nonsense, given water and its application is the basis of all wealth.

As difficult as building an inland two lane canal replete with lock gates to ensure endless water circulation, courtesy of forty foot northern tides. (very doable, where most of the preferred route is below sea level)

Add very large scale solar thermal power plants and power to new spage age desalination that produces as much as 95% potable water, and for around 25% of current traditional desal cost and economically viable for irrigation!

We have a two trillion dollar budget (growing) if it is accompanied by government guarantees, allow us to resettle literally millions of currently displaced folks (a ready made workforce) given they had no trouble (like the old afghan cameleers) fitting in, learning english, our customs and social mores.

Sorry but that virtually rules out most of the displaced muslims of the world, given most of them come from cultures just too medievil to cohabitate with, adapt to or accept modernity.

However, there are plenty of persecuted Christians who might be acceptable, particularly those accustomed to heat and flies and an arid (initially) landscape, which could be transformed into orchards and broad scale cultivation if it has the desalinated water delivered exclusively by underground applications (twice the production for half the water) or utilised in closed cycle application to grow broad scale algae, as the basis of an endlessly sustainable home grown oil industry and complete self sufficiency?

Algae absorb 2.5 times their bodyweight in atmospheric Carbon. And under optimised growing conditions can literally double that bodyweight every 24 hours. Some types are upto 60% oil and produce virtually ready to use diesel and jet fuel.

Extraction is a simple as sun drying some of the filtrate and then crushing and filtering it to produce ready to use as is, fuel!

The ex-crush biomass eminently suitable for a arable land and food free, equally large, petrol replacing ethanol industry, with the resultant sludge still being useful as a land conditioner?
Rhrosty.

Meanwhile why not check out the reference The Global Economy is a Giant Ponzi Scheme featuring Chris Hedges and Michael Hudson.
It is interesting to note that Geoff Davies who used to be featured on this forum argued the same case in his book Economia.

The discussion does not take into account that all the low hanging
fruit of energy is disappearing.
The main problem collapsing societies have had is declining returns on
energy/capital investment.

Because economists have been determined that money is the all
important factor they could not understand why neither austerity or
stimulus failed to promote growth.
They ignored the effect of cheap energy.

Bazz, what do you mean? Energy prices have fallen to new lows again, just as people like Julian Simon always said they would - and have been proved right again and again. Human ingenuity has the "energy problem" beaten already; it is just pessimism and watermelonism that says otherwise.

This is certainly a subject needing more honest consideration politically. I favour a shift of taxes off incomes and consumption and onto land. However, something major has changed since Henry George’s time.
The efficiency of global transport systems, and freedom of trade, has rendered most resources “super abundant”, and competition between resource owners globally depresses real commodity prices to something a lot closer to “costs of extraction”. Back in the era of George and Marx, resource owners generally wielded a power of “monopoly” rent – they could charge whatever, ultimately, end consumers of products within relatively closed and relatively “local” economies could be gouged for.
The term “differential” rent has been coined in economic literature since the 19th century, to describe “rent” that is NOT “monopoly” in nature. A “differential” rent is what the owner of a resource can capture because of the advantage of his location relative to other sources of the same resource (ease of extraction of the resource matters too).
For example, the Arabs have lately been capturing “differential” rent for their oil, because they cannot sell it for more than the owners of the next-most-cheaply-extracted oil source (or even substitutes). A gouging scheme like OPEC of course would have put some proportion of “monopoly” rent back in – but even then, the rest of the world does not sit around not looking for alternatives.
But the nature of “resource rents” today means that it is not the same source of taxation revenue that it might have been once. Now, a national tax on “resource rent” may well result in global customers looking elsewhere in the world for the same resources. The fact that there is already a “Mining GFC” indicates that we are still in an age of superabundant resources and the chill winds of the free market.
The whole point of a “land tax” is that it incentivises the land owner to at least put the land to best use, not withhold it from the market anticipating more capital gains. Resources you dig out of the ground are quite different to this.

More:

http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2016/03/could-a-137-year-old-equation-explain-financial-collapse/#comment-2568105

Phil of NZ;
An interesting thing happened on the way from Peak Oil.
Unexpectedly after the peak of crude oil in 2005 and the rise of
fracking and other expensive oil and the crash in 2008 in the following years demand declined and pushed down the price of oil to the ecent levels.
This was a completely unexpected effect of the high prices in 2010 to
2014. The resiliance.org web site has a number of articles about this
strange situation. Look for articles by Gail Tverburg.

The situation is that it is expected that 30% to 50% of US oil companies
will become bankrupt later this year or next year.
Bankruptcies have been increasing very significantly so far.
These are of course the heavily geared small tight shale fracking Companies.
The number of drilling rigs in operation has fallen since Jan 2015
to date from 1600 to about 464 this week. That speaks for itself.

If the decline rate exceeds the demand decline rate then the price
will rise. It is complicated because Iran & Iraq are expected to increase production.
Interesting times.