Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Inequality


AngryOfTuebrook
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've seen some stuff about taxing the land that assets sit on rather than the assets themselves as a means of capturing more revenues. I guess the idea being that you can't just offshore land onto some dodgy island the way you can various assets and that it would also help curb property speculation. I haven't read up on it in awhile though but a lot of people smarter than me seem to swear by it as a way forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

I've not read the proposals but the principle that we should increase tax on wealth rather than earned income is one I have been arguing for years on here.

No idea how it works over there -- is there not a capital gains tax?

2 minutes ago, Gooch said:

I've seen some stuff about taxing the land that assets sit on rather than the assets themselves as a means of capturing more revenues.

Do landowners in UK not pay property taxes?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

No idea how it works over there -- is there not a capital gains tax?

 

Yes, and the Lib Dems got it increased during the coalition, but it's substantially lower than income tax. And of course there are ways around it.

 

Do landowners in UK not pay property taxes?

 

Yes, but it's a tax on the property. A land value tax, which has been a liberal aspiration for more than a century, would be a tax on the unimproved value of the land. One of the issues in this country is that we have large companies hoarding plots of land thereby artificially limiting it and driving up the cost of land. If you tax the land itself you make holding land a financial liability and it incentivises doing something productive with it.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Yes, and the Lib Dems got it increased during the coalition, but it's substantially lower than income tax. And of course there are ways around it.

 

 

 

 

Yes, but it's a tax on the property. A land value tax, which has been a liberal aspiration for more than a century, would be a tax on the unimproved value of the land. One of the issues in this country is that we have large companies hoarding plots of land thereby artificially limiting it and driving up the cost of land. If you tax the land itself you make holding land a financial liability and it incentivises doing something productive with it.

You're fucked - you are never going to have enough money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/10/2021 at 21:13, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Yes, and the Lib Dems got it increased during the coalition, but it's substantially lower than income tax. And of course there are ways around it.

 

 

 

 

Yes, but it's a tax on the property. A land value tax, which has been a liberal aspiration for more than a century, would be a tax on the unimproved value of the land. One of the issues in this country is that we have large companies hoarding plots of land thereby artificially limiting it and driving up the cost of land. If you tax the land itself you make holding land a financial liability and it incentivises doing something productive with it.

I think a tax on undeveloped derelict land is a good idea, escalates per year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 23/10/2021 at 12:38, Bruce Spanner said:

This is an important front in their class war. They want to reassert, for generations to come, a national culture that dictates that good and worthy art* (and acceptable interpretations of art) comes from the elite classes, while the working drones know their place and remain in the gutter without even looking at the stars. Their class will be the creators and the curators. The rest of us will get the daily message that nothing we have to say is worthwhile.

(* Including literature - where it will be posh twats who decide what gets published - drama, TV, cinema, the lot.)

 

There's a reason why art critics and art historians tend to talk more like Brian Sewell than Brian Johnson.

 

Unless your parents are wealthy enough to fund your studies and connected enough to make sure you land on your feet, you will be effectively excluded from anything creative. The country will be spiritually poorer as a result.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...