tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post4092942166017429459..comments2024-03-05T10:52:24.691+00:00Comments on Mark Wadsworth: Killer Arguments Against LVT, Not (411)Mark Wadsworthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-57624842823307890242017-05-05T17:06:03.829+01:002017-05-05T17:06:03.829+01:00M, exactly
Kj, his parking meter example was part...M, exactly<br /><br />Kj, his parking meter example was particularly fucked up on so many levels.Mark Wadsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-31425542473382344232017-05-05T15:34:35.406+01:002017-05-05T15:34:35.406+01:00This one is especially precious:
"[–]broken...This one is especially precious:<br /><br /><br />"[–]brokenladder 1 poeng 3 dager siden <br />- It removes the incentive to accumulate land<br />Simply false. In order for an tax to change incentives, it has to be impacted by some action the person paying it can take. Consider a continuous parking meter for instance. If I vacate it, I stop paying. So that fee is an incentive for me to use less time.<br />But imagine after I book an hour, the city doubles the cost. Now I'm paying twice as much, whether I use the space or not. If I try to sell the space, it gives me no benefit, because the market rate is still the pre-increase rate that I originally paid.<br />The fallacy you're stuck in here is thinking that LVT is like the continuous meter when it's in fact like the pre-pay meter.<br />- increases the incentive to use it productively.<br />That's like saying an LVT can make some use of the land more profitable. Which is patently false."<br /><br />What on earth is he talking about. LVT is the continous meter, without LVT it's the prepay meter. <br />This is the same guy who has just conjured up a fantasy where apparently, everyone bought land from "society" and that banks somehow magically will pay all future rents if you just give themn some cash.Kjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13530243002915410700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-84883634449286905532017-05-04T10:44:04.893+01:002017-05-04T10:44:04.893+01:00Just imagine Bob and Alice start off equally wealt...Just imagine Bob and Alice start off equally wealthy. VAT is then imposed on Bob's wealth (labour or capital) but not on Alice's (rent). Suddenly Bob is much poorer, while Alice is unscathed. This is clearly arbitrary and wrongmombershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09650866436764567516noreply@blogger.com