tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post8444947297077349946..comments2024-03-05T10:52:24.691+00:00Comments on Mark Wadsworth: Killer Arguments Against LVT, Not (487)Mark Wadsworthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-5909555406156795432021-01-21T13:09:39.978+00:002021-01-21T13:09:39.978+00:00M, don't dignify the "fairness". The...M, don't dignify the "fairness". The underlying objection is not about "fairness" but merely points out that PWIMs can't pay it every month. Which is true but easily fixed. <br /><br />Implicit in the KLN is the acknowledgement that if a Rich Widow in a Mansion can afford to pay LVT, then that's fine.Mark Wadsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-40759025211143549702021-01-21T12:46:53.031+00:002021-01-21T12:46:53.031+00:00@KJP
"Allowing you to pay a tax after you ar...@KJP<br /><br />"Allowing you to pay a tax after you are dead does not make it a fair tax."<br /><br />Dead people don't need any money so a much fairer tax than taking the private property of alive people, especially those on low incomes and who are in poverty. The heirs of dead people can get a job like anyone else who would like a higher standard of livingmombershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09650866436764567516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-1259715396637579042021-01-20T12:30:24.415+00:002021-01-20T12:30:24.415+00:00JH, I've done one every week or two for thirte...JH, I've done one every week or two for thirteen years = 487.Mark Wadsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-62696364865652239582021-01-19T22:14:52.089+00:002021-01-19T22:14:52.089+00:00Are we stll only at 487, Mark? :)Are we stll only at 487, Mark? :)James Highamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14525082702330365464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-68033080549222967262021-01-19T10:25:29.068+00:002021-01-19T10:25:29.068+00:00KJP, who are you trying to convince?
1. Without s...KJP, who are you trying to convince?<br /><br />1. Without society and government, land would be worthless. Government costs money. It is very fair to make people who own land pay for the value of the services they receive. It is unfair for landowners to make 'everybody' else pay for those services twice over - once in tax and then again in rent.<br /><br />2. So now you are an LVT purist are you? If they had proposed proper LVT, you would oppose it with equally ineffective venom.<br /><br />3. Details, details.<br /><br />B, ta.Mark Wadsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-17812144896668283512021-01-19T09:49:37.424+00:002021-01-19T09:49:37.424+00:00"If land weren't so stupid expensive, lan..."If land weren't so stupid expensive, land and buildings would only be one-half of much lower UK "wealth"."<br /><br />and land, apart from agricultural land, has almost no intrinsic value at all, it's like a fiat currency. As an example of this, in Poole, there is a long spit of land that sticks out with the sea on one side of it and Poole Harbour on the other. It is mostly sand, so 120 years ago it was almost worthless. Now it is the most expensive land outside London. What has changed?<br /><br />KJP, the best is the enemy of the good.Bayardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15211150959757982948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-17193489619027422542021-01-19T01:06:38.602+00:002021-01-19T01:06:38.602+00:001 Allowing you to pay a tax after you are dead doe...1 Allowing you to pay a tax after you are dead does not make it a fair tax.<br /><br />2 You say this is an argument for LVT but what is proposed is a tax on built values not on land values.<br /><br />3 The calculations are skewed by SLDLT: that is a bad tax and should be removed.<br />KJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06643613741945132841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-52291634743172567722021-01-18T17:58:18.226+00:002021-01-18T17:58:18.226+00:00M, the actual statement is true. For "most&qu...M, the actual statement is true. For "most" people with any assets at all, the majority by value is housing. At least two-thirds of UK "wealth" is land and buildings, and most of that is housing.<br /><br />But it's completely irrelevant. If land weren't so stupid expensive, land and buildings would only be one-half of much lower UK "wealth".<br /><br />And think about it, let's rephrase as <i>"Since most people have the majority of their income from wages, a tax on income amounts to a tax on wages in disguise."</i><br /><br />So it is a bollocks stupid and irrelevant statement on any level.<br /><br />B, yes.<br /><br />PW, I believe that's the rule. "Debate" means a dozen MPs can be arsed to turn up, one mentions Poor Widows and the others nod sagely and dismiss it out of hand.<br /><br />But I get the impression that FairerShare have at least one MP fully on board to put up a defence. Fingers crossed.Mark Wadsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-17877147763269833862021-01-18T17:46:23.736+00:002021-01-18T17:46:23.736+00:00people = homeowners in DM newspeak
btw, I signed ...people = homeowners in DM newspeak<br /><br />btw, I signed this Fair Share petition and the number of signatures is > 100k; does it mean it will be debated in the House of Commons?Piotr Wasikhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05460291916106181718noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-46808254375599458022021-01-18T17:33:02.595+00:002021-01-18T17:33:02.595+00:00M, I think "people" here means Daily Mai...M, I think "people" here means Daily Mail readers. Those who don't read the DM and subscribe to its values aren't really "people".Bayardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15211150959757982948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-11142206307473084872021-01-18T17:13:02.582+00:002021-01-18T17:13:02.582+00:00"Since most people have the majority of their..."Since most people have the majority of their personal assets tied up in their homes, a property charge amounts to a wealth tax in disguise."<br />Any evidence? Fewer than half of adults are homeowners so that's a start. Then there a millions sitting equity that's likely not bigger than their pensions. And what about the asset poor, cash rich? Are they to forget about aspiring to be homeowners as they have to fund the state for homeowners?mombershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09650866436764567516noreply@blogger.com