Living rooms have shrunk?

[SirGalahad]

If they want to keep their land. Fine put it to productive use. I thought you abhorred idle layabouts draining the system?

 

[hard-work]

Kankerot, LVT creates internal tax havens. In the current system, income is the same no matter where you live. With LVT you can move to a lower land value area, and pay less LVT. For, e.g., an author who works alone can move to the side of a Welsh hillside and pay next to nothing. The author does not use the services of a city: metro, schools, parks, bus services, shopping, museums, galleries, restaurants, entertainment, etc, etc, so does not pay for them. There is a small element of the Poll Tax in LVT.

 

[SirGalahad]

Kankerot, LVT creates internal tax havens. In the current system, income is the same no matter where you live. With LVT you can move to a lower land value area, and pay less LVT. For, e.g., an author who works alone can move to the side of a Welsh hillside and pay next to nothing. The author does not use the services of a city: metro, schools, parks, bus services, shopping, museums, galleries, restaurants, entertainment, etc, etc, so does not pay for them. There is a small element of the Poll Tax in LVT.

Yet it makes so much sense for the vast majority. I should hazard probably 95% and up of the population but it's not a discussion point. The MPs and media are doing a good job by not bringing it to the attention of the public.

 

[hard-work]

Kankerot, to justify holding vast swathes of the country, large landowners spout that they look after and manage the land. That usually means putting up hedgerow fences, rather than metal mesh fences, which look prettier, to keep people off idle land - they may be given money from the EU to keep the land idle. They say look, the countryside is pretty and it must stay that way, as if people live on the land would not keep it pretty.

This land we collectively own as all land is owned by the Queen (us). Freehold means you hold the land free of charge, as opposed to leasehold, which is rent. Freehold is a map of the plot on the sovereign territory and a set of rights (rights which can change).

 

[Notch7]

Being facetious again.

It's taking from the unproductive to reward the productive entrepreneur. Or you have a better way to grow the economy without resort to immigration. I thought you would like that.

Unless you see yourself as a temporarily embarrassed land owner why are you objecting

By the way this doesn't take from anyone, the land owners can avoid LVT, just sell their land to someone who wishes to put it to productive use.

Im not being facetious, its a serious question.

Anybody that proposes a fundamental change to the taxation of a country must be prepared for a high level of scrutiny. Questioning how something works is not objecting to it.

By the way this doesn't take from anyone, the land owners can avoid LVT, just sell their land to someone who wishes to put it to productive use.

Thats not actually true though is it?

If a person owns 1000 acres, a new tax is introduced and then they have to pay tax they didnt before, anybody would reasonably say that is taking money from them (irrespective of whether it is a fair tax).

I dont see that saying 'the land owners can avoid LVT by selling the land' is helpful. Could you see that being used as an argument by politicians to justify LVT? Its a snake oil argument, If I didnt work I wouldnt pay tax. If I didnt buy anything, I wouldnt pay VAT etc etc.

 

[hard-work]

Of course any new tax has to be debated and it ripple effects focused upon. That is why we welcome debate.

LVT replaces taxes not add to them. The Georgist movement in the USA advocated a Single Tax, only LVT. Most want to reclaim "economic rent", to use for public services, no matter from where. Economic rent emerges in many forms. Also charging for resource extraction, use of air space, seas, electromagnetic spectrum, etc. etc.

If you think farmers will be hard done by look at this. These farmers are all pro LVT:

 

[SirGalahad]

Im not being facetious, its a serious question.

Anybody that proposes a fundamental change to the taxation of a country must be prepared for a high level of scrutiny. Questioning how something works is not objecting to it.



Thats not actually true though is it?

If a person owns 1000 acres, a new tax is introduced and then they have to pay tax they didnt before, anybody would reasonably say that is taking money from them (irrespective of whether it is a fair tax).

I dont see that saying 'the land owners can avoid LVT by selling the land' is helpful. Could you see that being used as an argument by politicians to justify LVT? Its a snake oil argument, If I didnt work I wouldnt pay tax. If I didnt buy anything, I wouldnt pay VAT etc etc.

The point you are not getting is LVT would replace other taxes, not just added to existing taxes.

So the tax would fall differently on people but it would be less distortionary than taxing income.

As capitalists we should reward work.

 

[hard-work]

I dont see that saying 'the land owners can avoid LVT by selling the land' is helpful.

I thought that was very helpful, but think deeper. If I own a 1,000 acres and I can't make 100 acres profitable (I could be a bad businessman, bad farmer, in the wrong business, business turn-down, etc), then to avoid paying LVT on 100 acres I can sell the land and gain a windfall as well. I could be a farmer, but a small industrial/commercial company may make the land profitable. As I do not know anything about manufacturing/commerce, the land is handed to those who know how to make the land productive. Then I do not pay the LVT for idle land any longer.

In the current system land would be kept idle doing sweet nothing. We are not even allowed to walk on this idle land, which in effect we own.

 

[hard-work]

As capitalists we should reward work.

As capitalists we should reward productive work. I know some people who work very hard to appropriate unearned income.

 

[hard-work]

Notch7, Fred Harrison in 2005 predicted the 2008 crash. He also predicted it in 1997.

Bust will follow boom – but when?
https://moneyweek.com/bust-will-follow-boom---but-when/

Socialise land, privatise wages
https://moneyweek.com/socialise-land-privatise-wages-13979/

 

[Notch7]

If I own a 1,000 acres and I can't make 100 acres profitable (I could be a bad businessman, bad farmer, in the wrong business, etc), then to avoid paying LVT on 100 acres

I understand the reasoning, but you are using a disingenuous argument. If you are trying to sell a change in taxation to the people, you have to use the comparison of existing situation to new situation. Your point is using the argument of options available to somebody after the tax has changed.

It isnt helpful trying to justify something using an argument that avoids transparency.

 

[SirGalahad]

I understand the reasoning, but you are using a disingenuous argument. If you are trying to sell a change in taxation to the people, you have to use the comparison of existing situation to new situation. Your point is using the argument of options available to somebody after the tax has changed.

It isnt helpful trying to justify something using an argument that avoids transparency.

He just made a comparison.

Before no tax. After tax.

You seem like a Blue Marxist. Capitalism is great but don't apply it to land.

 

[Brigadier]

I thought that was very helpful, but think deeper. If I own a 1,000 acres and I can't make 100 acres profitable (I could be a bad businessman, bad farmer, in the wrong business, business turn-down, etc), then to avoid paying LVT on 100 acres I can sell the land and gain a windfall as well. I could be a farmer, but a small industrial/commercial company may make the land profitable. As I do not know anything about manufacturing/commerce, the land is handed to those who know how to make the land productive. Then I do not pay the LVT for idle land any longer.

Why not "off-shore" the productivity of the 900 acres' worth of land, and pay no LVT at all?

 

[JohnD]

Unless you move the land itself out of the country, what makes you think it will be untaxed?

Land can't be hidden as easily as money, or moved as easily as tax domiciles.

 

[SirGalahad]

Why not "off-shore" the productivity of the 900 acres' worth of land, and pay no LVT at all?

Don't follow. You pay LVT based on the land value. You can't avoid it by offshoring your profits from anything you do on it, like you currently can through transfer pricing.

Read up about Dutch sandwich.