The Single Tax - Land Value Tax (LVT)

[heavenlyboy34]

You did.

Such claims demand evidence, Roy.

[heavenlyboy34]

Many will lend without payment, or repaid way into the future - the land is security. In a house the loan can be no payments and payable on death or sale of house/land. Many retired people do this, to tap into that wealth under the house, to enjoy themselves into their retirement without monthly repayments. Easy.

The same will apply to the Single Tax (LVT). The state will reclaim on death or sale of land.

Except Zippy's point still stands. You can't "tap into the wealth" without paying for it. A lot of people did this in Phoenix in the 2000's, and lost their homes because of the debt they incurred and couldn't pay back (they believed land prices would go up forever and the other lies propagated by the bankers and the financial racket). Again, you're trying to talk about things you don't understand.

[JohnLVT]

Except Zippy's point still stands. You can't "tap into the wealth" without paying for it.

You can. Read my post again.

[heavenlyboy34]

You can. Read my post again.

No you can't (unless someone is willing to eat some major losses). I read your post. Reality is against you, bro.

[JohnLVT]

You really must understand what happens now, then try and project that to a far superior economic system.

[Roy L]

No, I refuted your BS about the cab medallions.

No, you did not.

[Dan Sullivan]

Phony baloney.

Colorblind private individual land ownership without property tax creates the most secure prosperous societies. Sure the State virtually starves and that is liberating.

The "phony baloney" intro to the statement is ironic, as it describes the empty assertion above. Various indices of economic freedom rank Hong Kong as the freest economy in the world, followed by Singapore and Taiwan competing for second place. Hong Kong gets more of its revenue from land rents than any other economy in the world, followed by Singapoare and Taiwan.

New Hampshire was chosen by American Libertarians as the "free state," to which libertarians are encouraged to migrate. New Hampshire gets two thirds of its state and local revenue from real estate taxes. No other state gets more than half from real estate.

There is a direct correlation between the amount of taxes collected on real estate and the stability of housing prices. Far more people are losing their homes to banks where there have been housing bubbles, and housing bubbles have been worst where real estate taxes have been lowest.

Prior to a shift to a more right-wing "neolibertarian" approach, almost all libertarians challenged the legitimacy of state-issued titles to land. Property must flow from liberty for liberty to flow from property.

[Dan Sullivan]

The issue of land value tax is naturally a state and local issue. The way we issue money is the most fundamental federal issue. Ron Paul's focus has been on the federal government, which should stay out of the land question. The federal government should own no land other than what is needed for Constitutionally authorized federal purposes. To reduce the abuse of federal landholding, the federal government should pay the same taxes on the land it holds as anyone else pays.

Local governments compete, and, without state and federal interference, can discover for themselves which revenue approaches and which expenditures are most attractive. State governments complete less, and national governments use tariffs and immigration limits to severely curtail competition. The shift to sales and income taxes (which Ron Paul has always opposed) accompanied the shift from local government to centralized government. This is not coincidence, I think.

[Steven Douglas]

...housing bubbles have been worst where real estate taxes have been lowest.

Source?

Even if that was true, correlation does not equal causation. All you really showed is that real estate taxes are a strong disincentive for investment (and improvement), because you're just paying for something the government is going to claim ownership to and rent back to you.

Hey, but there is an upside to a housing bubble crash for tax collectors everywhere, because while the Fed-engineered housing bubble produced a windfall for property tax collectors, those same collectors and assessors are loathe to have that revenue stream collapse along with the real estate bubble. In California, the tax is based on whatever you paid, plus any improvement assessments that only add to you already pay. It's not until the next owner pays that there's a reduction in taxes - the person holding undervalued property is stuck with overvalued taxes.

When the housing bubble collapsed, property taxes tended to stay where they were at, or even continued (in the case of North Dakota and many other places) to grow in many places, as if nothing special happened to the housing market.

What a nice bubble-collapse proof tent that is. So much "stability" - for them.

[WilliamC]

The issue of land value tax is naturally a state and local issue. The way we issue money is the most fundamental federal issue. Ron Paul's focus has been on the federal government, which should stay out of the land question. The federal government should own no land other than what is needed for Constitutionally authorized federal purposes. To reduce the abuse of federal landholding, the federal government should pay the same taxes on the land it holds as anyone else pays.

Local governments compete, and, without state and federal interference, can discover for themselves which revenue approaches and which expenditures are most attractive. State governments complete less, and national governments use tariffs and immigration limits to severely curtail competition. The shift to sales and income taxes (which Ron Paul has always opposed) accompanied the shift from local government to centralized government. This is not coincidence, I think.

Now this actually starts to make more sense.

I'm not for any taxes, but if they are a necessary evil then the more local the better, and a local property tax or land tax to me is vastly different than some Federal or Global land tax which is what I inevitably see Georgists argue for.

Push power down to State and County governments and let them be the primary taxing authority, not the Federal Government. While not a perfect solution by any means it's a step in the right direction.