Since you have 1,250 acres you might be biased but it depends on the
value of your land, if it is very rural it is likely that a person in
some areas with an acre lot would have more valuable land but still I
would not want to run either the urban land owner or you off your
land because you can't pay your land value tax, in fact if either of
you are not a large corporation or a large LLC I don't think you
should be charged anything for your
title.
Still many economist say that a land value tax on the unimproved
value causes the least amount of harm to the general economy compared
to an income tax, general sales tax or property tax because the
property owner does nothing to increase the unimproved value of his
land both Milton and DAvid Friedman have favored a LVT over taxes on
income, sales or property improvements but as David said to one
geolibertarian once on a blog ( I think the mises blog) Neither he
or his dad thought taxing 100% of the rent like Henry George wanted,
actually George in Progress and Poverty said 90% but I fiqure David
and Milton would think that was to much as
well.
The big problem of both the property tax and the land value tax
is they run you off your land and home if you can't afford to pay,
some local areas give a defrement to seniors or veterns .Those who
live in Florida may know better than me but I think Florida allows
for a defrement if the property tax is more than 5% of your
income.
If there was going to be a Land value tax a defrement if the
tax went 5% over your income and you would pay the balance when and
if you sold the place, if a landowner passed it on to their children
the owner could pass it on without a gift or death tax but the
chidren would be liable for the defered taxes if and when they sold
the place. Of course a transfer tax on land with an heir exemption
might be even better than a land value tax, the AUstrilian state of
Victoria has both a gradudated land value tax and a graduated land
trasfer tax they make far more income from the graduated transfer
tax but the first 150,000 of value is exempt on the LVT but only the
first 20,000 is exempt from the land trasfer tax, both top rates are
around 5%. The transfer tax could be a user fee for the title but if
the county has a monoply on issuing titles I can't see how it could
be anything but a tax unless it is payed by most corporations then
it would be a user fee, if the corporation payed the title transfer
fee with federal reserve notes through the federal banking system I
think it would even more likely to be a user fee instead of a
coresive tax.--- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Alot of people have a hard time grasping anything that is not
overly
> generalized. I am glad to see you are not one of them. I personaly
> find land tax to be worse than income tax, however I have 1,250
> acres to think about wich could bias me a little, just as the man
> who claims that he suffers great injustive because he pays more tax
> then most Americans make as a yearly income might be biased on
> income tax. If the political class is taxed more than other groups,
> they too of course would have a bias.
>
> One thing, possibly the only one consistant thing, that binds
> libertarians together is that they don't like some one else
deciding
> for them. How do get such individuals to work together as a group
to
> achieve a common goal that servers the common good, rather than to
> think of there individual good? Untill this is possible groups
> capable of thinking as a group will pervail, a good example of this
> is the power that Evangelicals now wield. Group thought, scary but
> powerfull.
>
> --- In [email protected], "terry12622000" <cottondrop@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Actuallu Uncool Rabit both you and Tom are on to something but
> just
> > like the opposite side that gives the impression that only the
> well
> > to do pay taxes that hurt you two are also overgeneralizing but
> you
> > are overgeneralizing more than Tom. Tom's idea and the Boston Tea
> > Party is partly on the right road but still greatly fails to
> adress
> > the issue of the real class problem in the US and it slightly
> > overgeneralizes the 3 classes that are far from the real
> > problem.
> > The real class problem is not between the poor, middle and
> > upper classes but between the political class and everybody else,
> > everbody else by a big percent are probably members of the lower
> and
> > middle class especially the very middle and below, the political
> > class as a percentage probally tend to be members of the upper
> class
> > and the upper middle class in other words those making over the
> > median family income of around 60,000 is where the vast majority
> of
> > the political class with a majority probably being in the top 1%
> of
> > income earners and or asset controlers, the majority of the
> political
> > class tend to get much more of their income from other sources
> other
> > than wages or salary that the nonpolitical class, the political
> class
> > tends to get much more of its income from government prvildge
than
> > the non political class
> > does.
> > Now this does not mean that every rich person is a member of
> the
> > political class and no poor or lower middle class are members of
> the
> > political class so the income tax is a piss poor way of dealing
> with
> > the problem of class, it is a piss poor way of dealing with
> justice
> > and it tends to harm the real economy, sales tax, property tax
and
> > even the Land value tax aren't much better, actually the property
> tax
> > and Land value tax are much more unjust if people are runned out
> of
> > their homes and non corporate business because they can't pay
the
> > property tax but the Land value tax generally would be much
better
> > for the economy since the owner has no input to creating the
> > unimproved value of his
> > site.
> > I do almost agree with you that since the well off gain more
> from
> > government then it should be the well off who pays for the
biggest
> > share of government funding but I would say that it should be the
> > well off political class and they should pay for the Lions share
> of
> > government funding, the non poltical class rich, middle class and
> > poor should pay nothing because it is not their government, they
> may
> > want a government and I do too because one way or another you
> are
> > going to have a government or governments unless people in
general
> > just give way compltetly to short term instant gratification but
> what
> > we have is the political class's government so they should be the
> > only ones to pay for their
> government.
> > The few poor and lower middle
> > class political class members should pay something to be fair but
> the
> > well to do political class members should pay the biggest
> > percentage.
> > One possible source of revenue would be to charge the
> > Federal Reserve a fee on the Federal Reserve note and the
> notations
> > represented by the Federal Reserve Note, a economist from the
> > University of WIS. at Madison describes both as a user fee and a
> > tranasction tax, cash tranactions would never be taxed except
when
> > they go into the Banking system and when they go out, Liberty
> > Dollars, E-gold Time Dollars, Atica Dollars and barter would not
> be
> > taxed since they do not deal with the Federal Reserve/FDIC baning
> > system or the Federal Reserve
> Notes.
> > The US has over 850 trillion
> > dollars of tranactions per year increasing yearly, less than 5%
of
> > tranactions are cash, less than 5% are wages, less than 5% are
> retail
> > sales. At least 80% are currency trading tranactions ( with a
> great
> > majority being speculative, government bond trading, corporate
> bond
> > trading, stock options, futures and Real Easte
> > tranactions.
> > Current total government spending for all US
> governments
> > is around 4 trillion a year, so without any drop in tranactions,
a
> > transaction fee of a little less than 0.475% or 4 dollars and 75
> > cents on every 1000 dollars in transctions or less than 10 cents
> for
> > every 20 dollars or 4 thousand 7 hundred and 50 dollars on every
> > million. If wages, retail, wholesale, jobber, manufacturing,
> farming,
> > mining, utilities and non finical or real estate tranactions are
> > exempt then increase the fee by 20% for a fee a little less than
> > 0.57% or 5 dollars and 70 cents on every 1,000 dollar tranaction
> > where the fee applies. Of course tranactions will be reduced
> > especially since much of the tranactions are speculative FOREX
> type
> > currecy trades on a daily base. If all taxable tranactions are
cut
> in
> > half, doubling the tax to over 1.1% is likely not to make up the
> > short fall, so it is likely the fee could not be flat on all the
> > taxable
> >
>
tranaction.
> > Increasing the fee on the unimproved land and natural
> > resource value tranactions, on government privildge such as
> corporate
> > copyrights, corporate trademarks, corporate patents, corporate
> > licences in the use of broadcasting, the use of utlity right of
> ways,
> > corporate hospital lincence and corporate or LLC professional
> licence
> > would likely result in being able to cut the tranaction fee a lot
> on
> > currency trades. Also small corporations and LLCs could probably
> be
> > exempt from most of the above fees without much reduction in
> revenue
> > but I see no reason to cut the fees of large nonprofit
> corporations
> > including those run by the government including the pension funds
> > corporations of government employees.--- In
> > [email protected], "uncoolrabbit" <uncoolrabbit@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Why give in to defeatism? Solutions are possible if people
> persever
> > > and do not give in to the justifiable feelings of powerlessness.
> > >
> > > From Thomas Knapp's blog:
> > >
> > > The Boston Tea Party calls for legislation adopting an annual,
> > > regularized increase in the personal exemption to the federal
> > income
> > > tax of $1,000 or more, and the additional application of said
> > > personal exemption to all FICA/Social Security taxes paid by
> > > employees and employers.
> > >
> > > Members of Congress (mostly Democrats) routinely propose and
> vote
> > > for increases to the personal exemption, so it's politically
> doable.
> > >
> > > Increases to the personal exemption give EVERYONE who pays
taxes
> a
> > > tax cut, from the janitor at the local factory to Bill Gates.
> > >
> > > Increases to the personal exemption remove people from the tax
> > rolls
> > > and withholding treadmill entirely (every time the exemption
> goes
> > > up, more people's income falls below the taxable amount).
> > >
> > > Applying the personal exemption to Social Security payments
> would
> > > address the extreme regressivity of the Social Security system.
> The
> > > poorest people pay proportionately the most in Social Security
> > taxes
> > > (since the requirement to pay is capped at a certain income
> level
> > > in, I believe, the $60K range), and they receive the fewest
> > benefits
> > > (due to shorter lifespan).
> > >
> > > Eliminating the income tax is the best option. Failing that,
> > cutting
> > > it is. Replacing it with a tax that doesn't cut taxes, doesn't
> > > remedy redistribution problems, doesn't eliminate (or probably
> even
> > > reduce) the associated bureaucratic and administrative costs,
> and
> > > puts every American on government welfare is just a scam if the
> > goal
> > > is to reduce or eliminate taxation.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "big_azz_ham"
<big_azz_ham@>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >> Though they pay more of the total of goverment income,
> > > individualy
> > > > they are not paying a larger percentage of there disposable
> > > income.
> > > >
> > > > Why should anyone have to pay any percentage of their income,
> > > > disposable or not?
> > > >
> > > > Yes, I am for eliminating the income tax. However, it's a
> moot
> > > point
> > > > as we have passed the point of no return. We are going to
> > achieve
> > > > economic armeggedon in my life time. The federal debt is
$8.5
> > > TRILLION
> > > > and getting larger every year. Last year, the interest
> payments
> > > alone
> > > > amounted to $406 BILLION. 95% of all income taxes are paid
by
> > the
> > > > upper 50% of household income which means half the households
> > > don't pay
> > > > anything. Eventually, countries like China will stop buying
> our
> > > debt
> > > > when it looks like we will become insolvant. That's when the
> > > > government will crank up up the printing presses and try to
> print
> > > their
> > > > way out of this mess. The dollar, which is already a fiat
> > > currency,
> > > > will be become worthless. It's so predictable.
> > > >
> > > > In a word, we are screwed.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
