Doctor Drivel wrote
hugh wrote
Doctor Drivel wrote
djc wrote
Adrian Simpson wrote
hugh ] wrote

Revaluation should only take place when a property is sold IMO. That is the only point at which the value of the
property has any relationship with your income.

Most of the houses in my street were built in 1939. Up until 5 years ago, one of them was still lived in by its
original occupant. How would you have valued that one ?

Why not on its 1939 value. It reflects what the owner could afford
in 1939. If they stayed there all that time then : it had not *in
their view* appreciated vis a vis any alternative accommodation
they could afford; if it had they could have moved home and
realised the implicit capital gain.

In 1939 it probabaly costed £500, now maybe worth £500,000. What
have they done to earn that 0.5 million?
NOTHING.

They haven't gained a penny until they actually sell the house

They can get a loan/remortgage to tap into the wealth in the land under the house. If they do then the windfall for
doing NOTHING

They arent doing nothing, they are paying property taxes on that property.

comes on the sale. Landowning is a giant sluice for community created wealth locked up in land.

And arseholes like you want to the govt to tax that off them.

No thanks.

- then they have to buy somewhere else to live. Alternatively their estate will be liable for inheritance tax
eventually.

When they are dead. People usually do need a palace to live when selling a house.

They dont NEED a house either, they could live in a tent or caravan. No thanks.

Where did the value come from?
From economic growth by community acitivy. That is where land values come from -not the sky. Land Value Tax
"reclaims" that community waelth to pay for community services. But then no Income tax, VAT, etc. No one takes your
private wealth.

Taxing the hosue on the annual land "value", not the house value, will be very fair.

How do you define fairness?

If we cancel the tax on people's wages,

No one is actually that stupid.

how do we pay for public services?

By not cancelling the tax on people's wages, stupid.

By levying a charge on the "value" of land.

No country is actually stupid enough to do JUST that.

There might just be a reason for that.

People who live in valuable locations will pay much more than those who live in less expensive properties.

Why is that any better than a progressive income tax system ?

It isnt, which might just be why no country is that stupid.

That's fair.

Nope, not when they grew up in that place and it happened to see
land values go thru the roof and they dont have the income to pay
your utterly obscene tax slug, most obviously with the retired.

Nothing 'fair' about slugging them when they have enough trouble even
paying for their day to day expenses like food and electricity and water.

It also happens to be the most efficient way to fund the service we all share in common.

Even sillier. Its MUCH more efficient to do that via income tax
where you dont have to fart around attempting to work out
what the land would be worth if it had no buildings on it etc.

That isnt even possible in established citys with the bulk of the land.

Have fun putting a value on the land that Buck House sits on, or St Pauls either.

THE PROBLEM

Three million children today are living in poverty.

Thats a lie.

And those that do have a considerably worse standard of living
than most are that way mostly because their stupid 'parents' were
actually stupid enough to have a lot more kids than their economic
circumstances can provide a decent standard of living for.

Why should the state be slugging those who happen to end up
living in a house that happens to be on land thats worth a lot
more than it used to be worth be savagely slugged with an
LVT that produces a situation where they are in much more
poverty than the kids of those stupid parents ?

Nothing even remotely resembling anything like 'fair' in fact.

Successions of governments, of different parties, can't change this due to the tax system.

Even sillier.

Children born to the poorest families suffer little or no social mobility.

That is a bare faced pig ignorant lie.

They ALL have the opportunity to get a decent education and a decent job.

Are politicians to blame?

The biggest scam in history was instigated on the people centuries ago by the Lords, Barons and Knights of the land.
Governments used the tax system to milk the poor.

And then the world moved on and we invented a decent welfare
system that does in fact allow those of 'the poor' to bludge on
welfare for their entire 'lives' if they choose to do that.

Those whose entire income is welfare do in fact pay **** all in
the way of taxes except on the stuff like cigarettes and alcohol etc.

Why did they do it?

To enrich the people who own land.

And then the world moved on and we invented govt housing and welfare.

It is operated by all democratic governments around the world.

Not anymore. You're mindlessly living in the past of more than a century ago now.

The biggest winners are those who own land or homes in the best locations.

Thats wrong too. Those who have lots of kids and choose to bludge on
welfare for life and for the life of their kids etc end up with MUCH more
money in total than those who just have a house on a modest housing block.

People who rent pay rent to landlords and taxes to the government.
People who rent pay taxes to fund the service that they receive: police, rail, roads, army, etc. That sounds fair.
They pay for what they receive.

Not if their welfare pays the rent they dont.

Britain's top earners pay on average £1.25 million in taxes in their lifetime.

And those on welfare can end up with rather more than
that in their lifetime and the lifetimes of their kids that
choose to bludge on welfare if they spawn enough kids.

The people who rent their homes are generally in the lowest income bracket.

Plenty who rent arent.

Over their working lives the poor pay over £0.25 million in taxes.

Depends entirely on how you define 'the poor'

The rich on average pay 5 times more in taxes.

That number is straight from your arse, we can tell from the smell.

The real 'poor' those whose entire income is
welfare, dont pay anything like that in taxes
even if they spend it all on cigarettes and grog.

That sounds fair. Doesn't it?

Income tax is the more you earn, the more you pay. Called Progressive
taxes. Progressive taxes has exactly the opposite effect.

That is a bare faced lie.

Rich people complain that they pay a lot of money to the government. But, the government pays it all back to them.

That is a bare faced lie.

How do they do this?

Governments spend our tax money on infrastructure, such as: Schools Universities Hospitals Rail networks Roads

Govts actually spend FAR more on welfare
and services and employing civil servants etc.

This infrastructure raises the productivity of the economy resulting in economic growth. Because of the way the market
economy works, those economic gains are crystallised as land values.

Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.

Most of it actually ends up in wages and salarys.

Then these gains surface as windfalls or capital gains in the property market.

Not necessarily when inflation adjusted.

Those capital gains are not shared out equally amongst all of us, taxpayers who rent their homes for example, are
excluded.

Thats their problem. They are too stupid to buy
the house and rent instead, their problem.

The windfalls are pocketed by people who own land.

Which is now most of us.

The rises in property values more than offsets the taxes they pay into the public purse.

Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.

Then who pays for the services the rich people use?

They do. They dont use govt services much at all.

The families on the lowest incomes.

Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.

Families on the lowest incomes, those whose entire
income is welfare, in fact pay **** all in the way of
taxes at all, just on cigarettes and grog basically and
a few other terminal stupiditys like soft drink etc.

Every increase in house value for top earners offsets any tax they contribute.

Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.

They dont even see the increase in land value at all, even if they
sell the property, they have to buy another at the same land price.

During boom times it's possible to claw back a lifetimes taxes in just three years.

Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.

They still have to live somewhere, stupid.

Meanwhile...the lowest earners and those who pay rent, pay more overall.

And those whose entire income is welfare dont.

Families on the lowest incomes subsidise the lives of the rich.

Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.

Those on the lowest incomes are those whose entire
income is welfare and they pay **** all in taxes.

Is that fair?

The reality, completely different from your bare faced lies, certainly is.

Is very fair that those on the lowest incomes whose entire
incomes are welfare pay very little in the way of taxes at all.

There is only one way to make the tax system fair.

Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.

Parliament has to tell the taxman to stop collecting taxes from people's wages.

How odd that no one parliament has ever been that stupid.

There might just be a reason for that.

We need a kind of tax reform that Winston Churchill and Lloyd George nearly introduced in Parliament 100 years ago.

Those were the fools that returned to the gold standard and the
wrong price and damned near killed the economy in the process.

But, the landlords blocked them.

Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.

'the landlords' are a microscopic part of the voters, stupid.

The only war Winston Churchill lost was the war against the British landlords.

Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.

He also lost the economic war when he was actually stupid
enough to return to the gold standard at the wrong price
and damned near killed the economy in the process.

If we cancel the tax on people's wages,

No country has actually been that stupid.

Even Hong Kong before it was handed back to china wasnt actually THAT stupid.

how do we pay for public services? By levying a charge on the value of land. People who live in valuable locations
will pay much more than those who live in less expensive properties.

So those who are retired and have little income at all, who happen
to have lived in that house for 50 years or so, will be financially crippled.

That's fair.

Like hell it is.

It also happens to be the most efficient way to fund the service we all share in common.

Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.

THE SOLUTION

There is a simple solution to this injustice.

Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.

We should place the cost of public services on the values of land. Owners with houses in valuable locations would pay
more than those who rent their homes.

So those who have had enough of a clue to buy their own
home would be severely punished by your stupid system.

No thanks.

And the renters would be paying for that land tax in the rent they pay too.

Owners with houses in valuable locations
wouldn't be able to claw back their taxes.

Corse they can. They just move to a country that isnt that stupid.

That way everybody pays for the services they receive and we are all treated as equals

Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.

Those whose entire income is welfare do nothing of the sort.