--- Brian Holtz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > would it be more fair > to value every acre in > jurisdictions equally, or to value them according to > the sort of valuations > that local governments in America already compute?
It's more fair to have the assessments be based on current market value of a site, excluding the buildings. Professional appraisers and assessors would provide a more accurate estimate of value than one gets from zillow.com. Assessors use maps to smooth out similar neighboring properties. Also, a property owner could appeal an assessment, as he now can. In Bob Barr's web site, he says "The best approach would be to adopt a national sales tax," http://www.bobbarr2008.com/issues/ He does not explain why that is better than a land tax. Bob Barr wants to subsidize land owners, to pump up their land value with government public works the landowners don't pay for. He may be seeking campaign funds he would not get from landed interests if he were to promote a land value tax instead of a national sales tax, which by the way would also shift states towards sales taxes rather than income taxes, for a combined sales tax rate approaching 50 percent. He may gain the votes of big landowners, but Barr would lose the entire old folks votes, as their consumption would be cut in half. They have been paying income taxes prior to retirement, and now he wants to take away half their modest retirement income. If he is the candidate, I won't for him if he continues to push a national sales tax. If anyone can explain why conservatives hate consumption, I'd appreciate an explanation. Fred Foldvary
