Quote:
Originally Posted by BonnieDundee
But poor people spend more of their budget, it is regressive in that sense and generally considered so.
|
Yes, which was why I made clear that is had problems (in my view any tax will), but I consider it to be the so-called 'least bad'. Furthermore, in a later post in this thread you go on to talk about exceptions - in the society I would envision, such things as staples (food, fuel, etc) would certainly be considered for exemption.
The most important thing would be to lower prices and I see one of the best ways of doing this would be through reducing taxes on fuels.
Quote:
|
Well aside from the fact that everyone deserves equal access to land as even Locke noted this is a tax that is collected anyway.
|
By equal access do you mean before or after it has been appropriated? I could never support the after, but the before, sure. However, I think most (all?) of such land in the UK has been appropriated (and certainly not justly in many cases). I don't understand, however, what you mean by this is a tax that is collected anyway.
Quote:
|
It is simply value created by nature and society which is collected by the landlord's who did not create now, they are taxing us. The LVT simply removes this unearned income from them by taxing only ground rent ie the value of unimproved land created by society and nature and allowing society to use it.
|
Either I am being extremely obtuse or you have explained this poorly.
Could you please rephrase this, since I'm not understanding the sentence structure at all.
Quote:
|
I'd say it takes as much bureaucracy as some other forms of taxation.
|
That could be argued for. Why do you say so?
[/quote]It generally passes the burden on the consumer.[/quote]
I already made that point. Consumers, the largest block of society, will be hit by any tax no matter its form (except in property tax they will be called property owners, not consumers, and so forth).