In communist counties, unemployment is eliminated!

[EcoWarrier]

Yes, and also for the view of the Hong Kong Harbor, especially at night,

Amazing. A world economic dynamo is based on a view. We could have posters of Hong Kong harbor at the end of every street and then we could all be loaded.

[EcoWarrier]

In January 2008 2 million people in the USA lost their homes.
In January 2008 Wall St gave itself bonuses of $32 billion.

They gave themselves that bonus for crashing the world's systemically flawed financial system.

What we needs is a self-regulating system that does not crash. Geonomics is the answer. Based on using the common wealth created by land and its resources.

[luctor-et-emergo]

What we needs is a self-regulating system that does not crash. Geonomics is the answer. Based on using the common wealth created by land and its resources.

The free market in itself is a system that cannot crash.
Small portions of the system might go down, but this is more like avalanche control.
Companies fail, because they make mistakes. But this does not matter in the long run, the business assets can be sold or auctioned, the skilled workers can find employment elsewhere.
It is exactly when there is meddling in the free market, that there will be a buildup of too much snow. Investment is no longer allocated in the most efficient and beneficial way, but in a less efficient and inherently unfair way. After some time, the bust is inevitable. This is the crash you are talking about.

In this topic you claim;
-LVT is a tax SHIFT, rather then tax reduction.
-LVT would keep the 'free market' from crashing.

These two claims contradict each other.
Taxation is one of the influences on the free market which have a devastating effect on the stability. I accept that a single tax, that's the same for everyone would certainly be healthier for the free market. But there's still taxation. The big problem with that; spending. Spending is probably more important as a manipulator of the free market, it's the direct allocation of wealth where it would otherwise (probably) not have been. So you propose a less burdensome tax form, but the same amount of market manipulations...

Don't forget about the moral argument on taxation, it's the best argument, and IMO the only one you need. Taxation = theft.

[idiom]

In January 2008 2 million people in the USA lost their homes.
In January 2008 Wall St gave itself bonuses of $32 billion.

They gave themselves that bonus for crashing the world's systemically flawed financial system.

What we needs is a self-regulating system that does not crash. Geonomics is the answer. Based on using the common wealth created by land and its resources.

Hong Kong crashed pretty hard in '97.

Try again.

LVT has a demonstrated history of corrupting regulators which is how Wall Street gets its bonuses. A free Market is a self-regulating system.

Land rent makes the Kuomintang (KMT), the corrupt ruling party that has been in power since Chiang Kai-shek took refuge on Formosa over fifty years ago, the richest political party in the world. Not only does the KMT own about a quarter of the island's economy legally, they also collect an enormous amount of graft.

[EcoWarrier]

Focus please 2 million Americans losing their homes is not Hong Kong.

LVT has not demonstrated history of amazing success.

I wrote that slow because I know you can't read fast.

[EcoWarrier]

The free market in itself is a system that cannot crash when underpinned by Geonomics, otherwise it may crash.

You are right in that it is exactly when there is meddling in the free market, that there will be a buildup of too much snow.

In this topic you claim;
-LVT is a tax SHIFT, rather then tax reduction.
-LVT would keep the 'free market' from crashing.

LVT is a tax reduction. Studies, and actual real life experience, show that less tax overall is paid.

The 1929 & 2008 crashes were because debt up on debt was poured into LAND because gains were tax free. LVT prevents harmful land speculation preventing crashes. Money can then be poured into productive enterprise.

Geonomics does not tax private wealth, only commonly created wealth.

Taxation = theft. Correct. Taxing private effort is theft, taxing community created wealth for community services is not. Get it?

[luctor-et-emergo]

LVT is a tax reduction. Studies, and actual real life experience, show that less tax overall is paid.

Less tax paid = less spending. But government's tendency to grow spending, will turn into a tendency to raise LVT as well.
Government wants more power, that's what government is about, get it ?

Taxation = theft. Correct. Taxing private effort is theft, taxing community created wealth for community services is not. Get it?

There's no such thing as community created wealth. Value of products or services are highly subjective and based on personal opinion. There's no role of the community in that. Even if there would be such a thing as community created wealth, having it taxed would still be theft.

[EcoWarrier]

Less tax paid = less spending.

Exactly. Enterprise is encouraged, less welfare, etc. Also taxation is coming from commonly created wealth, not private. Common wealth that is appropriated is claimed back and does not end up in the pockets of the very rich - free-loaders. With Geonomics the rich will stay rich anyhow, as enterprise will flourish under Geoism. However the imbalance will be less and fairer.

The top 1% of the US own more wealth than the bottom 90%. Always remember that.

There's no such thing as community created wealth.

Look again. If you still think so, get out of La-La land.

We NEED taxation to run common services. Geonomics takes it from commonly created wealth, where it should taken from, leaving individuals productive effort alone.

[luctor-et-emergo]

We NEED taxation to run common services. Geonomic s takes it from commonly cretaed wealth.

What common services ?

Roads filled with potholes ?
Have your godgiven rights trampled on by a monopoly police force that's nearly unaccountable to the real employer; the taxpayer ?
Have brown people bombed in foreign lands ?
'Regulate' the internet ?

If you want services, go out in the free market, and pay someone for the service or product you want.
Don't be a shill for statism, I don't care who's going to pick the proverbial cotton, someone will find a solution and make a ton of money on it. May they reap ALL the fruits of their endeavor.

[John F Kennedy III]

Exactly. Enterprise is encouraged, less welfare, etc. Also taxation is coming from commonly created wealth, not private. Common wealth that is appropriated is claimed back and does not end up in the pockets of the very rich - free-loaders.

The top 1% of the US own more wealth than the bottom 90%. Always remember that.



Look again. If you still think so, get out of La-La land.

We NEED taxation to run common services. Geonomic s takes it from commonly created wealth.

What common services do we need taxation for?

[idiom]

What we needs is a self-regulating system that does not crash. Geonomics is the answer. Based on using the common wealth created by land and its resources.

Hong Kong had Geonomics. Hong Kong crashed.

Land rent makes the Kuomintang (KMT), the corrupt ruling party that has been in power since Chiang Kai-shek took refuge on Formosa over fifty years ago, the richest political party in the world. Not only does the KMT own about a quarter of the island's economy legally, they also collect an enormous amount of graft.

With no other taxes at all, Town A has an LVT of 4% and Town B has an LVT of 80%. Caeteris paribus, which town grows faster?

You answered Town B before. At what point does LVT stop enhancing growth? 200%? 500%?

[EcoWarrier]

Hong Kong had Geonomics. Hong Kong crashed.

Hong Kong does not have Geonomics. It a loose version land taxing which shows that even with a loose version there are massive gains.

Hong Kong NEVER crashed. Duh!! You must stop making things up.

[EcoWarrier]

What common services ?

All of them.

LVT is brilliant at funding infrastructure. The most given examples are the London Underground Jubilee Line rail extension and the Hong Kong Metro. In London it costed £3.4 billion to the UK taxpayers. Yet the land values around the line increased by £14 billion. They could have made 4 exensions by clawing back the land values the line created and not used central taxes, using commonly created wealth.

Hong Kong funded the building of a new underground metro and never used central taxation to do it. They taxed land. Using commonly created wealth.

[idiom]

Hong Kong does not have Geonomics. It a loose version land taxing which shows that even with a loose version there are massive gains.

Hong Kong NEVER crashed. Duh!! You must stop making things up.

Question 1. If Hong Kong never crashed and it doesn't have geonomics, then why would it need geonomics?
Question 2. Why do you keep using Hong Kong as an example of geonomics in action?
Question 3. What does this chart show?




Question 4. If Hong Kong doesn't have Geonomics then why does Jeffery J. Smith say it does?

Hong Kong is often cited by Fortune magazine as one of the best places in the world to do business (2). The Heritage Foundation ranks it and Singapore as a couple of the freest places on earth. The rankers site the low taxes, low prices, high salaries, and high investments, but somehow leave out that these are geonomic cities, recovering far more site rent than most other locations

[EcoWarrier]

Question 1. If Hong Kong never crashed and it doesn't have geonomics, then why would it need geonomics?

Hong Kong has minimal geonomics. But as I have explained to you, but it never sinks in, even with a minimal implementation Hong Kong thrives. Get it?

That you for giving the quote from Jeffery J. Smith - President, Geonomy Society
Hong Kong is often cited by Fortune magazine as one of the best places in the world to do business (2). The Heritage Foundation ranks it and Singapore as a couple of the freest places on earth. The rankers site the low taxes, low prices, high salaries, and high investments, but somehow leave out that these are geonomic cities, recovering far more site rent than most other locations

He is highlighting that the success is because of even a small implementation of Geonomics, which many other economists ignore.

[EcoWarrier]

At what point does LVT stop enhancing growth? 200%? 500%?

LVT adds vital stability. No booms and busts when fully implemented.

Hong Kong is small and peripheral to the Asian economy. If Japan crashes, it will take all around. Japan was bit by bit adopting the systemically flawed western economic system. The overall Hong Kong economy at any time is robust. Far more robust than others in the area.

[Steven Douglas]

Hong Kong has minimal geonomics. But as I have explained to you, but it never sinks in, even with a minimal implementation Hong Kong thrives. Get it?

I get it. Colorado has minimal fleas. But as I'm going to explain to you, but it won't sink in, even with minimal flea infestation the dogs and cats in Colorado miraculously thrive!

Get it?

We could ask if the apparent successes of any thriving economy could be attributed to anything that resembles LVT, however minimally implemented, or we could just as easily ask whether any thriving economy owes part of its success to how minimally LVT was implemented, then ultimately minimized or done away with entirely.

Get it?

You have LVT fever so badly that you naturally think of it as a magical virus that profoundly affects anything it is sneezed at in only the most positive and far-reaching ways. The apparent success of anything LVT even touches is automatically credited 100% to LVT (or leaseholds in the case of Hong Kong). Forget that many of these so-called "success" stories relate to major financial centers, like Johannesburg, Hong Kong and Kiaochow, the primary industries of which do not depend upon "good" land, but rather low taxation on financial sector services specifically).

Get it?

[Zippyjuan]

How is Hong Kong doing today? Kicking butt compared to other non- LVT countries in the global economic crisis?

http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...est-since-2009

Second-quarter gross domestic product rose 1.2 percent from a year earlier, according to the median forecast in a Bloomberg News survey of 15 economists ahead of data due today. Expansion was 0.4 percent in the first quarter, down from 3 percent in the previous three months and 4.4 percent in the third quarter.

The stalling economy adds to the challenges facing Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying, who took office on July 1 vowing to build a more equitable society as the territory’s wealth gap widened to a record. Thousands of residents have taken to the streets to demand higher minimum wages, direct leadership elections by 2017 and a halt to plans for “patriotic” education in primary schools.

“It’s likely that economic growth will still be as weak as, or even worse than, last quarter,” said Kevin Lai, a Hong Kong- based economist at Daiwa Capital Markets Ltd., whose forecast for 0.5 percent expansion is the second lowest. “One, and perhaps the only, way to bolster the economy is investment in infrastructure but I haven’t seen any increase coming there. What we need to hope for is a rebound in the global economy.”

Hong Kong’s expansion in the first quarter was the lowest since growth resumed in the last three months of 2009 and compared with a 7.6 percent pace in the first quarter of 2011.

Growth Review

The government estimated in February the pace of expansion would drop to 1 percent to 3 percent this year from 5 percent in 2011 and 7 percent the previous year as weak global growth hurt the export-reliant economy. Financial Secretary John Tsang said in July he would make an assessment this month whether the forecast needs to be adjusted in view of the faltering recovery in the U.S. and Europe and slowing growth in Asia.

How does their 1.2% growth compare to US growth for the second quarter?
http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/0...8780D020120809

Immediately after the trade report, economists forecast the initial second-quarter U.S. GDP growth estimate would be revised to as high as 2.2 percent, but tempered those predictions after a later report showed a decline in wholesale inventories in June.

Second-quarter growth is now seen revised up to an annual pace of at least 1.8 percent from 1.5 percent. The government will publish its second GDP estimate later this month.

[EcoWarrier]

Hong Kong would have disappeared in the financial tsunami only for taxing land.

Hong Kong is a gateway to China. HK is not at a natural international trade crossroads like Singapore is. Yet it is still one of the world's most important trading cities - because taxing land meant favorable economic conditions for companies to set up.

[Steven Douglas]

Hong Kong would have disappeared in the financial tsunami only for taxing land.

Wow, omniscient, are we? Did Clarence the angel give you a glimpse of what life in Hong Kong would have been like with private landownership and without leaseholds? Was it every bit the desolate, decadent PotterSomaliaville you imagined it would be, and did you help Clarence get another set of wings?

[idiom]

Hong Kong is a gateway to China. HK is not at a natural international trade crossroads like Singapore is.

Both of those sentences were written by you, next to each other. Which one do you agree with?

[EcoWarrier]

Both of those sentences were written by you, next to each other. Which one do you agree with?

Boy you are slow.

[EcoWarrier]

Wow, omniscient, are we? Did Clarence the angel give you a glimpse of what life in Hong Kong would have been like with private landownership and without leaseholds? Was it every bit the desolate, decadent PotterSomaliaville you imagined it would be, and did you help Clarence get another set of wings?

Amazing. More inane ramblings with no content whatsoever.

[Zippyjuan]

Taxes in Hong Kong have helped its growth- but LVT is not the primary reason.
http://www.lowtax.net/lowtax/html/hongkong/jhktax.html

Many countries consider Hong Kong an 'offshore' jurisdiction; the attitude of the government however is that the territory is not an offshore centre in the traditional sense of the word but rather a low tax area which levies tax according to the territorial principle. The tax laws of Hong Kong are extremely simple compared to other onshore jurisdictions and the fiscal advantages of operating there could be summarized as follows:
• Tax rates are extremely low by OECD standards. (See below for further details). Taxation case law is minimal since the low tax rate means that the costs associated with challenging a decision of the revenue authorities usually outweigh any monetary gain.
•Taxes are levied according to the "territorial principle" meaning that taxes are only levied on income "derived from or arising in" Hong Kong and not on income sourced outside the Territory.
• A number of taxes that exist in most jurisdictions do not exist in Hong Kong. Thus there are no capital gains taxes, no withholding taxes, no sales taxes, no VAT, no annual net worth taxes and no accumulated earnings taxes on companies which retain earnings rather than distribute them. In the long term it is intended to completely phase out stamp duty on the sale and issue of shares and securities and to reduce direct taxes further.

Propterty taxes in Hong Kong :
http://www.batgung.com/hktaxes

How do property taxes work in Hong Kong? Who exactly pays the property taxes when I buy or rent a flat or other home?

Mr T replies: Property taxes here are known as 'Government Rates'. They are irritatingly expensive, but not extortionate. According to the Inland Revenue webpage, you pay 16% a year of your property's 'net assessable value'. How this is calculated is a bit obscure; I'll over-simplify it and say that you pay about 16% of the amount you could get in rent for your property in a year. Just keep in mind that you're not assessed according to your flat's market sale value. From my experience, it seems you don't end up having to pay quite as much as the definition from the Inland Revenue suggests.

If you're renting, you'll often find the phrase 'rates included' in ads for rental properties, but you'll have to pay them if the landlord doesn't (this is something for flat-hunters should always check).

Odaiwai adds: Just to clarify a little further -- the rates will usually be several thousand Hong Kong dollars a year, payable quarterly.

That 16% rate would be considerably higher than property tax rates in the United States. The highest average property tax rates are in Texas- and even theirs are only about 2.5%. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/10/bu...ptaxrates.html

Article from 2010:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-1...omebuyers.html

Hong Kong Property Sales Slide 83% as Higher Tax Deters Weekend Homebuyers

Weekend sales of used homes fell 83 percent from the previous week, according to data from Centaline Property Agency Ltd. The changes mean homes sold within six months of purchase incur a 15 percent stamp duty, while down payments will rise to 50 percent for properties costing HK$12 million or more, and to 40 percent for those between HK$8 million and HK$12 million.

“The measures will likely have the biggest and most lasting impact on property prices seen to date,” Donna Kwok, a Hong Kong-based economist at HSBC Holdings Plc, said in a report. “Hong Kong has jumped onto the bandwagon of Asian central banks and is erecting its own defenses to fend off the flood” of capital from the U.S. easing, she said.

Hong Kong’s currency peg to the dollar prevents its de- facto central bank from raising interest rates to deter speculation. South Korea revived a tax on foreigners investing in its bonds last week, while Brazil tripled a tax on purchases of local fixed-income assets by overseas investors.

[Zippyjuan]

Let's apply the Hong Kong property tax rules to the US. Say you have a condo which could rent for $1000 a month. Taxes would add $160 a month to that (even if you are renting) so you would have to pay $480 to the government every three months or $1920 a year.

And since that applies to the " rental value" and not the purchase price, you could find yourself taxed out of a home if you bought a long time ago and rental rates rose a lot around you. In the US that can still happen with property taxes in some states where property is valued not at what you paid (and could afford at the time) but on what they are selling for now. I live in California where that does not happen- property value only gets stepped up when the property gets resold. I will still pay property taxes after I get the home paid for, but they cannot rise exorbinately to what I cannot afford and am forced to sell.

[devil21]

"We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us."

I think that was the motto in the USSR.

[idiom]

Boy you are slow.

That answers the question how?

Hong Kong is a gateway to China. HK is not at a natural international trade crossroads like Singapore is.

Both of those sentences were written by you, next to each other. Which one do you agree with?

[EcoWarrier]

Let's apply the Hong Kong property tax rules to the US. Say you have a condo which could rent for $1000 a month. Taxes would add $160 a month to that

LVT is geared to the rental value of the property. Which may be a different value to the place in the next street or district.

LVT restricts opportunist renters who do nothing and use property as a do nothing side-line. Only those who know the property business and manage it well will get involved as they known how to make a profit. LVT will put more land and homes into private ownership as the get-rich-quick types sell up. Land prices will not ratchet up inexplicably to most of the population. Land will stabilize with no boom & busts.

Hong Kong could do a lot more to caputure land values - they do not do enough. They should also not do deals with shark land operators.

you could find yourself taxed out of a home

Inane nonsense, showing a clear misunderstanding of geonomics and LVT.

[EcoWarrier]

Both of those sentences were written by you, next to each other. Which one do you agree with?

Boy you are slow.

[Working Poor]

I hear that China has a 6% unemployment rate..........