tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post8157674269784094637..comments2024-03-05T10:52:24.691+00:00Comments on Mark Wadsworth: Killer Arguments Against LVT, Not (294)Mark Wadsworthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-48625687127667196352012-12-22T10:25:06.665+00:002012-12-22T10:25:06.665+00:00RS, righty-ho. I've never heard gypsies compla...RS, righty-ho. I've never heard gypsies complaining about having to pay rent for their sites. <br /><br />BJ, I wasn't going to do the one with the Tardis or living underground, but I'd heard this one before so I thought I'd do it.<br /><br />AS, if they choose to live on campsites, why is that a ghetto? They are perfectly entitled to buy houses if they like. <br /><br />J, yes of course non-payers will think up all sorts of excuses, but ultimately, if people don't pay then they have to be moved on/out, just to serve as an example. <br /><br />B, most people wouldn't want to live on a gypsy site, but that does not mean it has negative value to them. It has positive value to them and that is what they pay for. Mark Wadsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-57581540554785005632012-12-22T09:18:47.659+00:002012-12-22T09:18:47.659+00:00J, the main point is: who wants to live on or near...J, the main point is: who wants to live on or near a Gypsy site? No-one except Gypsies. Who wants to have a business on or near a Gypsy site? Ditto. Thus the rental value of Gypsy sites is even less than farmland, therefore they wouldn't attract any LVT. I would have thought that, given the prejudice against Gypsies, Gypsy sites represent the LVT baseline, the sites with the least possible location value, if not negative location value.Bayardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15211150959757982948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-30624402539574860862012-12-22T08:49:02.246+00:002012-12-22T08:49:02.246+00:00OK, if they are eligible for the CI and they occup...OK, if they are eligible for the CI and they occupy a site less valuable, then there's no problem, but I thought the point was that they won't agree to pay but stay anyway. Then when the police try to move them on they will claim some sort of rights are being infringed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-86681706503055558892012-12-21T19:10:09.396+00:002012-12-21T19:10:09.396+00:00My very own KLN. Fame at last!!!
My very own KLN. Fame at last!!!<br /><br />benjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11544297406005346095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-83118470360861631642012-12-21T19:06:00.427+00:002012-12-21T19:06:00.427+00:00Mark, I wouldn't think they would envy Gypsies...Mark, I wouldn't think they would envy Gypsies, I was answering the question: "so why should someone who is good at it have to carry everyone else?"Bayardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15211150959757982948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-12456754331030191292012-12-21T16:46:07.151+00:002012-12-21T16:46:07.151+00:00Won't happen.
Gypsies, like the rest of us, a...Won't happen.<br /><br />Gypsies, like the rest of us, are rent seekers at heart. There will be an over arching landlord among them... opposing the idea with all their strength.Robin Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04648517992918303543noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-14454994376709757982012-12-21T15:53:36.260+00:002012-12-21T15:53:36.260+00:00B, does even the most hardened Mail reader envy Gy...B, does even the most hardened Mail reader envy Gypsies? They are perfectly entitled to sell their houses, buy caravans and club together to rent their own field in the middle of nowhere for £1,000 per caravan per year if they want.<br /><br />Not the life I'd choose right now, but if I found some like-minded nutters and wanted to 'drop out', then why not?Mark Wadsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-57513575859697770432012-12-21T13:57:53.437+00:002012-12-21T13:57:53.437+00:00M, one word answer: envy.M, one word answer: envy.Bayardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15211150959757982948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-7026064041614456742012-12-21T13:21:24.022+00:002012-12-21T13:21:24.022+00:00M, exactly. Even under current rules, high earners...M, exactly. Even under current rules, high earners could save themselves a fortune by renting or buying a shoebox in Scunthorpe instead of a footballer's mansion in Cheshire or a townhouse in Chelsea, but mysteriously, they don't. They could also cut their car tax by using the bus instead of buying a new BMW, go figure.Mark Wadsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-29193419595001785992012-12-21T12:46:22.668+00:002012-12-21T12:46:22.668+00:00The amazing thing about several KLNs is that it is...The amazing thing about several KLNs is that it is objectionable that people have the option to pay no net tax regardless of their income. Generating income is a Good Thing, so why should someone who is good at it have to carry everyone else? And the chances of many high earners suddenly deciding that they want to live in shoeboxes in Scunthorpe are less than bugger all anyway. mombershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09650866436764567516noreply@blogger.com