What do you think of Land Value Tax (LVT)

[JohnLVT]

Yeah, I've heard that myth somewhere before -- "community created"/"provided" wealth.

It is clear you lack understanding of where land values come from. The landowner does not create the value in the land. Get to know this fundament aspect of economics - it is not an opinion.

Land Value Taxation does not tax the land you occupy. Community created economic growth soaks into the land and crystalizes as land values - that is where land values come from. This is economics, not an opinion. Land Value Tax merely reclaims that growth and puts it back into the cycle to fund the infrastructure that aided the creation in the first place. Currently the cycle is cut and a giant sluice is inserted taking away that wealth in the form of windfalls in the land market - socially created wealth is privatized. It needs to be 180 degrees the other the way around. LVT reclaims community created wealth to pay for community services.

Many Geoists observe two prime negative and destructive points of current taxation in modern states:

• Privately created wealth is socialized - via Income Tax, sales tax, etc.
• Socially created wealth is privatized - community created land values are extracted by individuals and organizations.

The Geoists rightly argue the opposite should be the case in that a Single Tax using only Land Value Tax will:

• Socialize socially created wealth - socially created land values are reclaimed and used for community revenues.
• Privatize privately created wealth - no Income Tax, etc, is levied, hence people keep the fruits of their labor.

Geoists view the Single Tax (no Income Tax, tax on buildings, sales tax, etc) as only using socially created wealth to fund social and state services, with an individual retaining 100% the fruits of their labor. This appeals to many across the political spectrum.

All this has be proven in use around the world, even in the USA. I never made all this up.

[ClydeCoulter]

If I buy a piece of land, there is no wealth created or soaked into that land other than what I do with it, that's not an opinion.

Others may build around my land, create theoretical wealth all around it (in the sense that if you bomb it all, what's it worth then), they can envy my land, desire to have it because of it's theoretical value, etc. Many years later, it becomes a ghost town of sorts, some of the original owners have stayed and endured all the percieved successes and turnovers.

[JohnLVT]

If I buy a piece of land, there is no wealth created or soaked into that land other than what I do with it, that's not an opinion.

"Roads are made, streets are made, services are improved, electric light turns night into day, water is brought from reservoirs a hundred miles off in the mountains -- and all the while the landlord sits still. Every one of those improvements is effected by the labor and cost of other people and the taxpayers. To not one of those improvements does the land monopolist, as a land monopolist, contribute, and yet by every one of them the value of his land is enhanced. He renders no service to the community, he contributes nothing to the general welfare, he contributes NOTHING to the process from which his own enrichment is derived."
- Winston Churchill

[ClydeCoulter]

Except that he pay for any service that he choose to enrich himself with that others have brought near to him. Or he still burns wood for heat, lights a candle, etc.. Free Market.

[JohnLVT]

Except that he pay for any service that he choose to enrich himself with that others have brought near to him. Or he still burns wood for heat, lights a candle, etc.. Free Market.

Those who rent still pay for the same services. A man who pays for utilities did nothing to increase the values of his land. Nothing as Winston Churchill said.

Fred Harrison again....

THE PROBLEM

Three million children today are living in poverty. Successions of governments, of different parties, can't change this due to the tax system. Children born to the poorest families suffer little or no social mobility.

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.

Why did they do it?

To enrich the people who own land. It is operated by all democratic governments around the world. The biggest winners are those who own land or homes in the best locations.

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.

Britain's top earners pay on average £1.25 million in taxes in their lifetime. The people who rent their homes are generally in the lowest income bracket. Over their working lives the poor pay over £0.25 million in taxes. The rich on average pay 5 times more in taxes.

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.

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

How do they do this?

Governments spend our tax money on infrastructure, such as: Schools Universities Hospitals Rail networks Roads 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. Then these gains surface as windfalls or capital gains in the property market.

Those capital gains are not shared out equally amongst all of us, taxpayers who rent their homes for example, are excluded.
The windfalls are pocketed by people who own land. The rises in property values more than offsets the taxes they pay into the public purse. Then who pays for the services the rich people use? The families on the lowest incomes.

Every increase in house value for top earners offsets any tax they contribute. During boom times it's possible to claw back a lifetimes taxes in just three years. Meanwhile...the lowest earners and those who pay rent, pay more overall.

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

Is that fair?

There is only one way to make the tax system fair. Parliament has to tell the taxman to stop collecting taxes from people's wages.

We need a kind of tax reform that Winston Churchill and Lloyd George nearly introduced in Parliament 100 years ago. But, the landlords blocked them.

The only war Winston Churchill lost was the war against the British landlords. If we cancel the tax on people's wages, 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. That's fair. It also happens to be the most efficient way to fund the service we all share in common.

THE SOLUTION

There is a simple solution to this injustice.
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. Owners with houses in valuable locations wouldn't be able to claw back their taxes. That way everybody pays for the services they receive and we are all treated as equals

[ClydeCoulter]

For a man that inhabits his land, it's value is to him is what he has put into it. He sees no value from those around him other than what he pays for to enrich himself of their goods or services. He does not prohibit growth around him, neither is he responsible for it. He considered a a price for a piece of land when he bought it, then he considered his effort to supply himself with his comforts, which are his.

I can see a man invest to build himself and his family a good place to provide for themselves. Someone envies his land and the land around him, perhaps because he is competition or for some large development. He does not choose to sell out, so they enrich the environment around him and thrust him from his place through LVT.

[JohnLVT]

For a man that inhabits his land, it's value is to him is what he has put into it.

Basic economics tells us that land values come from economic growth activity from the community. Understand that. Do not fight it.

I can see a man invest to build himself and his family a good place to provide for themselves.

LVT does that for him, as it does not extract wealth he created via income tax.

[Roy L]

Hmmmm...I think Roy has a sock puppet account

Congratulations on finding something else to be wrong about.

[Roy L]

Wouldn't it be easier (and more fair) just to have absolutely no taxes on property?

No, it would be far less fair, because the value of land is publicly created. Giving it away to landowners in return for nothing is self-evidently unfair, as it means they get something for nothing. Someone else -- producers -- are therefore getting nothing for something. That's not fair.

[Roy L]

He doesn't need to, we've already proven we are.

All apologists for privilege, greed and injustice lie. That is a natural law of the universe. There has never been an exception to that law, and there never will be.