From here:
You are confusing "rent-seeking" and development for profit. If a landowner does not develop land with potential for improvement he does not lose anything (take set-aside as a case-study) but if he develops the land your increased "location" tax becomes a drain until the development is passed on. It becomes a giant pass the parcel until someone wealthy enough to hold the developed land acquires it. In fact what it does is ensure that it passes to the very "rent-seekers" you are trying to eliminate. LVT is a great reason NOT to develop or improve property.
If you are getting services and benefits you should be making a contribution (however small) towards them.
The Left's hatred of anyone who rents out a property or owns land is envy, pure and simple.
As long as you tax the rental income properly, don't allow tax free gains on the properties and stop developers just hoarding land, a healthy rented sector is good for the housing market and for society as a whole.
Guess what happens when you put a tax on rents. They go up.
The whole concept of council tax is based on their belief you own nothing and your home is theirs to charge rent for.
etc. etc.
Wednesday, 22 October 2014
Various Anti LVT Entertainments
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
"Reader, my husband and I are over 55. We continue unashamedly to occupy the four-bedroom house in which we raised our children. One of the "superfluous" bedrooms which we illegitimately retain is fitted out with bunk beds so that our grandchildren can stay with us. Another of the excess rooms has a sofa bed in it so their parents can stay as well. "
Put them in a hotel, then. £100/night at a Premier Inn. For the half dozen times you need it a year, it's much cheaper.
We don't have a spare room for this reason. We've cleared our mortgage, don't really want another one in a hurry and I'd rather hand the occasional £100 to a hotel for the times I need to put people up than heat an empty room for 360 days a year.
An army of "advisers" with endless junk phone calls would spring up to rip off old people
That's an original twist on the 'army of valuations officers' KLN isnt it?
I'd much rather give mine to some bearded mediaeval retard from Pakistan with umpteen wives, some of whom may be men for all anyone can see of them, and their huge family of children and assorted hangers on.
LVT is a neo-socialist form of ethnic cleansing / gerrymandering?
One of the tests of a civilisation is the right of the ordinary citizen to own property without the permission of the state. Is that the next to disappear?
LVT is the end of civilisation (Mr Unslickers fav objection I believe)
"Guess what happens when you put a tax on rents. They go up."
Good KLN, in which landlords have nothing to complain about have they?
Equal and opposite KLN, to quote J Redwood:
"LVT is a dagger to the heart of land values"
So the KLN is that prices would go down.
If rents went up but buying prices went down, then tenants would simply buy their own homes and everybody's happy, aren't they?
IF FTBs who have to pay off mortgages can afford the LVT, then so can older people, end of.
Steven_L,
"One of the tests of a civilisation is the right of the ordinary citizen to own property without the permission of the state. Is that the next to disappear?"
One of the tests of civilisation is also the right for people to have free choice. As some of my choices involve me earning money and the government taking some of that, is that also the end of civilisation?
SL: "One of the tests of a civilisation is the right of the ordinary citizen to own property without the permission of the state. Is that the next to disappear?"
Well, does having a tax on spending (VAT) mean that you need government permission to spend money? No, not really. You just spend it and pay the VAT.
(in economic terms, the VAT is borne by the retailer, so if anything it is a "payment for licence to run a business").
And what about income tax? Does that mean that people need the state's permission to go to work or run a business? Not really, they can freely go to work or run a business, they just have to pay some of their income or profit to the government.
What about rent or mortgage interest? That's a payment for the right to occupy land. Does the tenant or the mortgage borrower really give a shit who is being paid?
Landlord, bank, government, it's all the same thing, only the landlord and the bank spend the rent on themselves and even a kleptocratic government like ours only spends a quarter on itself and the rest is spent on Good Stuff - pensions, schools, hospitals, law and order etc.
Do these poeople actually prefer PAYE and NI and VAT to a simple and clear LVT system? It beggars belief.
Grandchildren are the human shield for poor widows in mansions :)
I'm sure Janet is clamouring for more housing to be built right next to her, and for the government to stop socially cleansing low income families from expensive areas!
Post a Comment