What do you think of Land Value Tax (LVT)

[Dr.3D]

What makes it your land?

The title of ownership does.

[erowe1]

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.

[Dr.3D]

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.

[ctiger2]

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.

[erowe1]

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?

[Mahkato]

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?

[Dr.3D]

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.

[erowe1]

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.

[tremendoustie]

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.

[tremendoustie]

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.