LVT

[Anarchist420]

That would be able to replace all taxes, wouldn't it? I think an annual land value tax of 3% (maybe less) (possible if all land were privatized), would bring in more revenue than all the other taxes we have combined.

What the hell is wrong with that?

The only 2 problems with a land value tax are that it's a direct tax and the value of land is subjective and would be valued by the government, but I think there could be ways around that.

 

[Anarchist420]

Well, it's not quite a $3,000 tax on voting, but as long as it's a low rate, then it's not as harmful as any other tax I can think of.

 

[MotF Bane]

Just. stop.

 

[GroundedSailor]

I pay close to 3% of the assessed value of my house as property taxes already - as does everyone in my area. How is that going to replace any other taxes?

..

 

[dawp]

corporations will never let this fly since they generally are the biggest land owners in a given area. They will pay what ever it takes to avoid taxes.

 

[Anarchist420]

I pay close to 3% of the assessed value of my house as property taxes already - as does everyone in my area. How is that going to replace any other taxes?

..

What if all land was privatized?

 

[dawp]

What if all land was privatized?

Ain't going to happen. people like their national and state parks too much. Just try to privatize Yellowstone or Yosemite.

 

[classy]

what is lvt?

 

[MotF Bane]

what is lvt?

Read the OP - Land Value Tax.

 

[classy]

Oh I see

 

[dawp]

It's in the op, land value tax

MotF beat me to it.

 

[classy]

Truthfully we have two problems with our tax code. Far too many wealthy people pay far too little. Just flatout too many loopholes. And the second is the poor and lazy pay nothing. The second is worse than the first.

 

[shiner]

I think we should go to a P.V.T. (Post Value Tax)

Luckily you would be exempt since your posts are worthless.

 

[Cogman]

corporations will never let this fly since they generally are the biggest land owners in a given area. They will pay what ever it takes to avoid taxes.

Actually, they would LOVE this. A small patch of land with a large skyscraper on it would allow them to pay some pretty small amounts on taxes. And if the sky scraper raises the land value, they just have to dump some toxic waste on their grounds or make it as ugly and unkempt as possible to get the lowest taxes possible.

The people who would really suffer from this are poor farmers that own tons of land. You would essentially make farming impossible because it would be way too expensive to own a large amount of land for such small returns.

Enter, massive US starvation.

Dumbest Idea Ever. (DIE for short)

 

[RedChief]

Does the federal government tax itself then? Figuring they own ~30% of the total land in the US.

 

[Cogman]

Does the federal government tax itself then? Figuring they own ~30% of the total land in the US.

Thats It! You found a way to end national debt! The government could just tax itself, that way it could pay off all debt!

 

[dawp]

Actually, they would LOVE this. A small patch of land with a large skyscraper on it would allow them to pay some pretty small amounts on taxes. And if the sky scraper raises the land value, they just have to dump some toxic waste on their grounds or make it as ugly and unkempt as possible to get the lowest taxes possible.

The people who would really suffer from this are poor farmers that own tons of land. You would essentially make farming impossible because it would be way too expensive to own a large amount of land for such small returns.

Enter, massive US starvation.

Dumbest Idea Ever. (DIE for short)

actually, if it was for the value of the property, the skyscraper would add an enormous amount of value than if it was just undeveloped.

and like I said earlier, the public will not allow the National parks to be sold off.

 

[Cogman]

actually, if it was for the value of the property, the skyscraper would add an enormous amount of value than if it was just undeveloped.

and like I said earlier, the public will not allow the National parks to be sold off.

Yes, they would add value, but honestly, how much? And couldn't that value be counteracted by having gawd-awful looking skyscrapers? or destroying the surrounding land? Or even having an ugly skyscraper in the middle and surrounding it with manufacturing plants, ect to decrease its value.

Ultimately, instead of building nice looking buildings, corporations would side with as ugly as possible in the worst neighborhoods possible to try and save money.

And that still doesn't answer the question of farmers. Even now, small time farmers have multi-million dollar land (usually inherited) and yet can't pull in more than a 30-60k per year. Would you really propose charging them upwards of 30k per year? How on earth would they afford that? Farming would become almost impossible, increase food costs and ultimately causing massive inflation.

 

[MotF Bane]

Truthfully we have two problems with our tax code. Far too many wealthy people pay far too little. Just flatout too many loopholes. And the second is the poor and lazy pay nothing. The second is worse than the first.

I actually agree with that.

 

[dawp]

Yes, they would add value, but honestly, how much? And couldn't that value be counteracted by having gawd-awful looking skyscrapers? or destroying the surrounding land? Or even having an ugly skyscraper in the middle and surrounding it with manufacturing plants, ect to decrease its value.

Ultimately, instead of building nice looking buildings, corporations would side with as ugly as possible in the worst neighborhoods possible to try and save money.

And that still doesn't answer the question of farmers. Even now, small time farmers have multi-million dollar land (usually inherited) and yet can't pull in more than a 30-60k per year. Would you really propose charging them upwards of 30k per year? How on earth would they afford that? Farming would become almost impossible, increase food costs and ultimately causing massive inflation.

It will never happen anyways, once talks starts of privatizing all public land, like Anarchist420 suggested, it will end rather quickly. it's just not a feasible plan.

 

[cubby1223]

So you're basically saying we pay for this country through a tax on agriculture?

On the other hand, this would relocate factories out to the middle of the Arizona desert

 

[Attic]

Start taxing poeple for being assholes instead of providing incentives for them to act like assholes.

Call it the asshole tax.

 

[shiner]

Start taxing poeple for being assholes instead of providing incentives for them to act like assholes.

Call it the asshole tax.

As an asshole I am 100% against this idea.

 

[Anarchist420]

The LVT sounds like a bad idea to me, now that someone mentioned that farmers would pay most of it. But then, people who own roads, assuming they were privatized, would pay it. But then that would raise the cost of using roads.

I really don't get why so many people don't quit being assholes and just agree to reinstate the Articles of Confederation with a few modifications that I propose.

The FairTax sucks badly and would make for a lousy replacement of the income tax. Taxing Medical procedures, housing, and food at 30% just isn't any good. Plus it would create more criminals rather than less FFS. Teens who cut lawns are supposed to collect the tax.

I guess non-protectionist tariffs are the least painful.

 

[CallMeJoe]

...I really don't get why so many people don't quit being assholes and just agree to reinstate the Articles of Confederation with a few modifications that I propose...

It's probably because almost everyone but you realizes what a terrible idea that is.