Explain to me why replacing income and business taxes by land value tax isn't the most efficient and fair solution for economic growth.
Next convince me that the only reason why it is not implemented is not greedy boomers votes...
economist.com
progress.org
americanaffairsjournal.org
Other urls found in this thread:
realtor.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
adamsmith.org
twitter.com
Boomers sabotaging my thread
Fuck you, paying to rent your own land is disgusting.
> Hurr I bought a house 40 years ago on a land that generations conquered and defended with their blood before I even existed so now its my private property forever
So you prefer paying taxes on your own work than the land of your country ?
Jow Forums doesn’t have enough IQ to understand the benefits of land value tax. Lolbertarians will screech and shout “taxation is theft”, Boomers and kikes will whine about anything that threatens their property values.
>jews use land tax to bankrupt the last remaining family farmers and petite estates
>jews use creative accounting and shell corporations to avoid paying any tax themselves
If you look at who profits, the answer is clear.
So you think that taxing working class people's home is fair but taxing billionaire's accumulated wealth isn't?
You already do this retard - tax on land is included in property taxes. You also pay taxes on your labor, taxes on what you purchase with your savings, taxes on what you earn after investing your savings, taxes on your inheritance, etc.
What a shit idea. Its a tax on living in any home.
You think people who rent wouldn't pay this bull shit landlords would pass the buck to renters.
Property taxes are wrong and should be abolished not expanded.
You cannot hide land in the Bahamas, the land is owned by someone he will pay. Cannot be evaded, its the most efficient tax. A lot of tax evasion lawyers would lose their job.
Land is not worth much in farms or working class suburbs. But the billionaire with a giant flat in center NY or SF is going to pay the price of luxury.
Fag
Like if everyone who owns a little condo has a 2nd home in the Bahamas.
You are so stupid, Frenchy.
No this taxation is the best for productive renters who work. The higher rent is compensated by no income tax. Probably lot of job created if there were no business tax either which push salaries up.
People hurt by this tax are big owners who just sit on their inherited properties and milk the rent without working or producing anything. Or people who own well placed land, build nothing of value on it and just keep it for speculation.
Wtf are you on mate ? The point is you cannot hide your land in another country, so you pay taxes in the country you use.
Nothing to do with owning a house in the Bahamas.
It's not a tax on the home. It's a tax on the land only. If you don't build anything at all on the land, you will still pay a tax on the land value. If the land has gold or crude oil in it, you will pay a high tax based on the high land value, regardless of whether or not you extract any wealth from the land. If the land is only good for farming, it's value will be much lower, and so will the taxes. If the land is only good for a residential home, the tax will be paid only on the land value, regardless if you build a tiny house or a mansion, or if you build it out of plywood or brick, etc. The property tax is levied upon the building value. This means that if you build a sturdier and more beautiful home you will be punished with higher taxes than someone who builds an ugly, delapitated shanty.
A land value tax discourages speculators from buying lots of land and hoarding it. It encourages people to put the land to it's best economic use.
>you own
did you make it?
did you buy it from somebody who did make it?
did anybody make it?
>but muh improvements
the value of improvements is not taxed by LVT, unlike under property tax.
>family farmers
family farmers are more productive per acre than large scale farmers, who rely on more land input than labor input. LVT does raise all food prices to some extent, but not equally, it favors efficient use of natural resources, which family farms already better at.
>creative accounting
explain how a simplification of taxation based on a demonstrable market value rather than arbitrary legal standards will allow more "creative accounting" than literal thousands of pages of law.
>Implying working class people are less efficient users of land than the average
>implying billionaire's sources of accumulated wealth aren't all the result of the state in three forms 1) direct cronyism 2) land monopoly 3) patent and copyright monopolies, and that all of these monopolies should not be abolished
>Its a tax on living in any home.
yes it is, but to virtually all working and middle class people, the taxes are effectively lower, as the majority of land value is concentrated for business use, and more for large than small businesses
>You think people who rent wouldn't pay this bull shit landlords would pass the buck to renters.
for any normal, produced good, this would be true, but land is not produced, it is fixed in quantity, and there will always be the same amount to sell, and prices therefore can be set by the owners rather than determined by the market
>Property taxes are wrong and should be abolished not expanded.
property taxes, yes, since those tax improvements on land, which are produced, rather than only the value of the land itself, which is not
The land value tax was pioneered by French economists know as the "physiocrats."
Omnizoa is wrong in his utilitarian contract theory, I support a theory of natural rights, but he explains the issue well.
youtube.com
youtube.com
>A land value tax discourages speculators from buying lots of land and hoarding it. It encourages people to put the land to it's best economic use.
Yeah, its way better to immediately exploit the land and its resources as soon as possible than to hold onto it when society will actually benefit and need it. This is speculators speculate, they buy something thinking itll be needed later, and hope to sell it then. If they were to just go in and immediately start using it all up, that potential added value to society in the future is lost. Don't be a fucking idiot.
typical french socialism at work here.
Amen brothers. It just makes sense that land is a limited resource whose price is going up mechanically with population growth and the owner benefits from unwarranted wealth increase.
But some boomers are really happy with the situation because they bought before globalization, mass immigration and earth population explosion and became wealthy without producing anything.
>use it all up
to the contrary, a policy which taxes land would necessarily mean that less land is used, not more since there is an incentive pay less tax. Rent, the profits normally assumed by the speculator, does not disappear, but is made public, distributed among all individuals.
>socialism
ah yes, Adam Smith, the famous french socialist
Sure, except Adam Smith strongly supported the idea.
> adamsmith.org
> Nothing can be more reasonable than that a fund, which owes its existence to the good government of the state should be taxed peculiarly, or should contribute something more than the greater part of other funds, towards the support of that government.
What the fuck would a frog know about property ownership?
Ad hominem
And I know about it because we have a big generation of boomers here who became wealthy just sitting their ass on a property.
France being a fiscal paradise for real estate and hell for working and investment is one of the main reason we are so fucked.
But guess what boomers dont give a fuck and they go to Portugal (no tax on retired people) after they sell the property to Chinese/Saudi investors.