Page 1 of 68 1231151 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 2026

Thread: What do you think of Land Value Tax (LVT)

  1. #1

    Default What do you think of Land Value Tax (LVT)

    Land Value Tax on Wikipedia

    A land value tax (or site valuation tax) is a levy on the unimproved value of land. It is an ad valorem tax on land that disregards the value of buildings, personal property and other improvements. A land value tax (LVT) is different from other property taxes, because these are taxes on the whole value of real estate: the combination of land, buildings, and improvements to the site. An LVT does take into account the effect on land value of location, or of improvements made to neighbouring land, such as proximity to public works or a shopping complex.
    Although the efficiency of a land value tax has been known of since Adam Smith,[1] it was perhaps most famously promoted by Henry George in his best selling work 葬Progress and Poverty鋳 (1879). George argued that the value of land was created by the community, and therefore its rent belonged to the community.[2]
    Land value taxes have been implemented in Taiwan (Republic of China), Hong Kong, Singapore, Russia and Estonia, as well as in some localities in the American state of Pennsylvania, the Australian state of New South Wales and Mexicali, in Mexico. The government of the Republic of Ireland is considering the introduction of an LVT.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    I don't like a tax where if unpaid, they can take your land. It's my land, and they should have no power over any of it. All property taxes should be abandoned.

  4. #3

    Default

    I say: eliminate all taxes, and then institute a nation wide sales tax of 5 %. That would be enough to fund government.

  5. #4

    Default

    I've read Progress and Poverty and I think George's reasoning is sound. It's a tax on rent which, if you understand the Law of Rent, I think is much more fair than some sort of flat sales tax. A sales tax punishes the consumer more than the producer.

    I take George's idea even further. I think there should be a flat tax on wealth itself. This to me, after all I've looked at, seems to me the most fair. You could tax people on their average daily/monthly/yearly net worth. This would allow a flat percentage to be taken from everyone equally and wouldn't be a burden on the lower class any more than the upper class and producers.

    The only problem with this is the difficulty in enforcing fairly. Perhaps we could just start with measuring real property/assets and also on your average daily bank balance.

    I've said this elsewhere on the boards and many disagree saying that you shouldn't get taxed on what you already own, so they think a flat sales tax or import tax or whatever is more fair. I disagree.
    I begin with the principle that all men are bores. Surely no one will prove himself so great a bore as to contradict me in this. - Soren Kierkegaard

  6. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.3D View Post
    I don't like a tax where if unpaid, they can take your land. It's my land, and they should have no power over any of it. All property taxes should be abandoned.
    Secure in their possessions. It is fundamental to liberty.
    "Everyone who believes in freedom must work diligently for sound money, fully redeemable. Nothing else is compatible with the humanitarian goals of peace and prosperity." -- Ron Paul

    Brother Jonathan

  7. #6
    Member donnay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Live Free or Die Trying!
    Posts
    19,840
    Blog Entries
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.3D View Post
    I don't like a tax where if unpaid, they can take your land. It's my land, and they should have no power over any of it. All property taxes should be abandoned.
    Absolutely!
    *Legal Disclaimer: While I am a keen researcher and want nothing more than to help people, I am not a doctor and more importantly, I am not your doctor. Any article I post that contains general information about medical conditions, treatments and remedies is to bring awareness. The information is not advice, and should not be treated as such. You should never delay seeking medical advice, or discontinue any medical treatment because of information in an article I have posted. The only advice I would give is to continue to research further and use discernment with all advice.

  8. #7

    Default

    I agree 100%. Property tax is even worse than an income tax. I can't think of a worse form of taxation than one that can result in your home being confiscated.
    "Sorry, guys, the rebellion is off. We couldn't get a rebellion permit."
    "What is this, a home owner's association? Why the need to try and control other people's behavior?"



  9. #8

  10. #9
    Member donnay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Live Free or Die Trying!
    Posts
    19,840
    Blog Entries
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tod View Post
    I agree 100%. Property tax is even worse than an income tax. I can't think of a worse form of taxation than one that can result in your home being confiscated.
    As it stands right now, property owners are just glorified renters to the state. The American Dream is an illusion, so long as there is a tax on ones property.
    Last edited by donnay; 02-01-2012 at 11:58 AM.
    *Legal Disclaimer: While I am a keen researcher and want nothing more than to help people, I am not a doctor and more importantly, I am not your doctor. Any article I post that contains general information about medical conditions, treatments and remedies is to bring awareness. The information is not advice, and should not be treated as such. You should never delay seeking medical advice, or discontinue any medical treatment because of information in an article I have posted. The only advice I would give is to continue to research further and use discernment with all advice.

  11. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.3D View Post
    I don't like a tax where if unpaid, they can take your land. It's my land, and they should have no power over any of it. All property taxes should be abandoned.
    What makes it your land?
    I知 not a libertarian. I知 not advocating everyone run around with no clothes on and smoke pot.

  12. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    What makes it your land?
    The title of ownership does.

  13. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.3D View Post
    The title of ownership does.
    If that's the case, then all the government has to do is write a title with themselves as the owner, and the land is theirs.
    I知 not a libertarian. I知 not advocating everyone run around with no clothes on and smoke pot.

  14. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    If that's the case, then all the government has to do is write a title with themselves as the owner, and the land is theirs.
    Heck, they already think they own everything I have. I wouldn't put it past them to do such a thing.

  15. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JackieDan View Post
    I say: eliminate all taxes, and then institute a nation wide sales tax of 5 %. That would be enough to fund government.
    I agree. I also wouldn't be against luxury taxing people who own multiple plots of land. Primary residence should NOT be taxed, so this would cover 95% of the population. You just don't want people hording land so I'd think a minor land luxury tax might be a good idea.

  16. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.3D View Post
    Heck, they already think they own everything I have. I wouldn't put it past them to do such a thing.
    Then is that all that really makes the land yours? Just that the government says so is on a title? When they give titles for enormous amounts of land to various utilities and other companies, is their ownership of that land as legitimate as some family's homestead?
    I知 not a libertarian. I知 not advocating everyone run around with no clothes on and smoke pot.

  17. #16

    Default

    I know that many people here would like to see all taxes abolished. I'm wondering if you think LVT is an improvement over traditional property taxes or other taxes. As long as a government exists, what would be the most liberty-friendly way of funding that government? Does LVT have a place in funding local governments, for example?

  18. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    Then is that all that really makes the land yours? Just that the government says so is on a title? When they give titles for enormous amounts of land to various utilities and other companies, is their ownership of that land as legitimate as some family's homestead?
    What should be and what is are two different things. I worked hard and paid for the land, it should be under my supervision, not anyone else. The state has done nothing to deserve what I own.

    I'm not going to get into a philosophy debate here....

    Do you believe you own anything or are you one of those people who believe the state owns everything. If you believe the state owns everything, then welcome back to the age of Lords and manors.

  19. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.3D View Post
    What should be and what is are two different things. I worked hard and paid for the land, it should be under my supervision, not anyone else. The state has done nothing to deserve what I own.

    I'm not going to get into a philosophy debate here....

    Do you believe you own anything or are you one of those people who believe the state owns everything. If you believe the state owns everything, then welcome back to the age of Lords and manors.
    I don't believe the state owns everything. But I also don't believe that all of the land ownership according to current legal titles is legitimate. You may have bought your land, but it can't be taken for granted that the person who sold it to you legitimately owned it in the first place. I'm honestly not sure what to do about this problem.

    I'm against all taxes, and I think all taxes are theft. But if I were to get into a debate where I had to choose one kind of tax over others, I'd choose a tax on land (possibly based on acreage, rather than assessed value), and it would include a true homestead exemption, where individuals would not be taxed at all on a single plot of land up to a certain size. I also wouldn't have a problem with having the tax rates above that size increase progressively with the amount of land owned. I think a scheme like this would ameliorate the problem of corporate welfare in the form of land grants.
    I知 not a libertarian. I知 not advocating everyone run around with no clothes on and smoke pot.

  20. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JackieDan View Post
    I say: eliminate all taxes, and then institute a nation wide sales tax of 5 %. That would be enough to fund government.
    I like the first part of your plan.

    We need to freely choose who we do business with. To grant that the government has the right to forcibly take money from people to fund itself is to lose 100% of the principle of personal ownership and property rights.
    的f you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive. -CS Lewis

    The use of force to impose morality is itself immoral, and generosity with others' money is still theft.

    If our society were a forum, congress would be the illiterate troll that somehow got a hold of the only ban hammer.

  21. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    I don't believe the state owns everything. But I also don't believe that all of the land ownership according to current legal titles is legitimate. You may have bought your land, but it can't be taken for granted that the person who sold it to you legitimately owned it in the first place. I'm honestly not sure what to do about this problem.

    I'm against all taxes, and I think all taxes are theft. But if I were to get into a debate where I had to choose one kind of tax over others, I'd choose a tax on land (possibly based on acreage, rather than assessed value), and it would include a true homestead exemption, where individuals would not be taxed at all on a single plot of land up to a certain size. I also wouldn't have a problem with having the tax rates above that size increase progressively with the amount of land owned. I think a scheme like this would ameliorate the problem of corporate welfare in the form of land grants.
    I agree that most of the original land grants were illegitimate. However, it's not possible to correct all of the grievances of history, and I certainly don't see how taxing people's property has anything to do with justice at all.

    It's best just to work for freedom starting now. Land ownership will balance out over time, and revert to those who really produce things their neighbors need, if the government is not there to prop up their corrupt buddies.

    I would support opening up national forest to reasonable homesteading.
    的f you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive. -CS Lewis

    The use of force to impose morality is itself immoral, and generosity with others' money is still theft.

    If our society were a forum, congress would be the illiterate troll that somehow got a hold of the only ban hammer.

  22. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Washtenaw Co., MI
    Posts
    3,833

    Default

    Who values the land? Isn't value subjective? Couldn't I make a profit from "unimproved" land, and couldn't I lose money by improving my land?

    And if I improved my own homesteaded land, why do govt cronies get to take a cut of my efforts? Did they come and build irrigation channels and lay a cement foundation? If I didn't ask them to help in any way, where do they get off trying to create a duty for me to pay them?
    "You cannot solve these problems with war." - Ron Paul

  23. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    What makes it your land?
    I would say having purchased it via voluntary agreement constitutes legitimate ownership, regardless of whether whoever owned it 300 years ago acquired it legitimately.


    Obviously we can't fix all wrongdoing through history. Actually though, I'd even say the same thing on a shorter timescale. If you steal a TV set, then sell it to me (in a manner that would not lead a reasonable person to suspect that it's stolen), I think you're liable for the value of the TV set, to the victim of your theft, but I'm not obligated to simply give it back.

    Of course, homesteading is a legitimate way to acquire land also, but it's not so common these days.
    Last edited by tremendoustie; 09-12-2011 at 10:29 AM.
    的f you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive. -CS Lewis

    The use of force to impose morality is itself immoral, and generosity with others' money is still theft.

    If our society were a forum, congress would be the illiterate troll that somehow got a hold of the only ban hammer.

  24. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tremendoustie View Post
    I agree that most of the original land grants were illegitimate. However, it's not possible to correct all of the grievances of history, and I certainly don't see how taxing people's property has anything to do with justice at all.

    It's best just to work for freedom starting now. Land ownership will balance out over time, and revert to those who really produce things their neighbors need, if the government is not there to prop up their corrupt buddies.

    I would support opening up national forest to reasonable homesteading.
    I agree that we shouldn't try to correct those past injustices. But I also don't think that methods of taxation and lack of available homestead land are entirely unrelated. I got the idea from Jefferson, who said it better than I could.
    http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/P/tj3/writings/brf/jefl41.htm

    But again, none of this is to defend any tax over no taxes at all, just one tax versus another.

    Edit: I guess that letter is kind of long. Here's the money quote:
    Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions or property in geometrical progression as they rise. Whenever there are in any country uncultivated lands and unemployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right. The earth is given as a common stock for man to labor and live on. If for the encouragement of industry we allow it to be appropriated, we must take care that other employment be provided to those excluded from the appropriation.
    Last edited by erowe1; 09-12-2011 at 10:34 AM.
    I知 not a libertarian. I知 not advocating everyone run around with no clothes on and smoke pot.

  25. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tremendoustie View Post
    I would say having purchased it via voluntary agreement constitutes legitimate ownership, regardless of whether whoever owned it 300 years ago acquired it legitimately.
    Practically, this might be the best way to go. But if I sell you the Brooklyn Bridge through voluntary agreement, that wouldn't make it rightfully yours, since it's not mine to sell.
    I知 not a libertarian. I知 not advocating everyone run around with no clothes on and smoke pot.

  26. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    Practically, this might be the best way to go. But if I sell you the Brooklyn Bridge through voluntary agreement, that wouldn't make it rightfully yours, since it's not mine to sell.
    How much do you want for it? j/k

    The more I think about, the more I like poll taxes. If you want a government, when you vote is a great place to pony up.

  27. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krugerrand View Post
    How much do you want for it? j/k

    The more I think about, the more I like poll taxes. If you want a government, when you vote is a great place to pony up.
    Actually, that's a good point. I forgot how much I preferred poll taxes to others. Being able to get out of taxes just by not voting, and letting those who pay taxes be the ones who vote on the representatives who decide how their own money gets spent, is probably as fair as any tax could be.
    I知 not a libertarian. I知 not advocating everyone run around with no clothes on and smoke pot.

  28. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.3D View Post
    Originally Posted by erowe1 What makes it your land?
    The title of ownership does.
    technically unless you have an allodial title you do not own the land.
    go small or go home

  29. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by loveshiscountry View Post
    technically unless you have an allodial title you do not own the land.
    Well, judging from history, technically, those who have the ability to defend the land from being taken from them own it.

  30. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    Actually, that's a good point. I forgot how much I preferred poll taxes to others. Being able to get out of taxes just by not voting, and letting those who pay taxes be the ones who vote on the representatives who decide how their own money gets spent, is probably as fair as any tax could be.
    It's so fair, it could hardly be called a tax . More like a fee.

    Of course, this only works if the government doesn't start trying to run the lives and property of people who didn't vote/consent ...
    的f you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive. -CS Lewis

    The use of force to impose morality is itself immoral, and generosity with others' money is still theft.

    If our society were a forum, congress would be the illiterate troll that somehow got a hold of the only ban hammer.

  31. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    Practically, this might be the best way to go. But if I sell you the Brooklyn Bridge through voluntary agreement, that wouldn't make it rightfully yours, since it's not mine to sell.
    That's certainly true. Brooklyn bridge is a bit different from a TV set, because physical possession is less practical -- also, the bridge is currently controlled by the government.

    That said, suppose some private individual built Brooklyn bridge, but you, as the biggest baddest guy in NY (perhaps the government), manage to send men over to take it over and start charging tolls. A couple months later, I show up as a rich immigrant in NY, with no clue about this history. You then "sell" it to me for a fair price.

    I'd say you owe the original builder of the bridge full damages, but I get to keep the bridge. Alternately, you might return the money to me (along with extra $ for the inconvenience), and I return the bridge to the original owner.

    Regardless, I do have a legitimate claim on the property at that point. Simply taking it from me and giving it back to the original victim of the theft would not be justice.
    的f you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive. -CS Lewis

    The use of force to impose morality is itself immoral, and generosity with others' money is still theft.

    If our society were a forum, congress would be the illiterate troll that somehow got a hold of the only ban hammer.

Page 1 of 68 1231151 ... LastLast




« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •