Re: Land, Labour and Capital Taxation....
From: Igor (jjweatherby_at_houston.rr.com)
Date: 12/30/04
- Next message: Igor: "Re: Land, Labour and Capital Taxation...."
- Previous message: Robert Vienneau: "Re: increasing return to scale and perfect competition"
- In reply to: royls_at_telus.net: "Re: Land, Labour and Capital Taxation...."
- Next in thread: Igor: "Re: Land, Labour and Capital Taxation...."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 06:59:24 GMT
royls@telus.net wrote:
>
>>so I don't see the theoretical problem with going after land rents,
>>even confiscating them entirely, first, since it is indeed true that
>>there is nothing a land-owner can do directly to a parcel to raise its
>>land rent.
>
>
> That is the point.
>
Roy if you want to go after land rents and even confiscate them all you
have to measure. By now you have even see that land rent is not the rent
a tenant pays the landlord so please do tell us how to apply Ricardo and
George's idea of rent to a system that can be estimate so that we can
tax all the rent. Tell us how a flat rate will not tax more than rent on
lnad with 0 economic rent.
I am not saying a tax on unimproved land is not a good tax perhaps
better than a tax on labor but do not think you are directly taxing
rents or that it would be easy to eliminate rent without taxing well
above rent on some lands. A LVT is closer to efficent than a labor tax
but until you get away from current government accounting on unimproved
land and are able to actually measure economic rent do not believe that
the tax will be efficent. It will be closer to efficency than current
taxes but not efficent.
- Next message: Igor: "Re: Land, Labour and Capital Taxation...."
- Previous message: Robert Vienneau: "Re: increasing return to scale and perfect competition"
- In reply to: royls_at_telus.net: "Re: Land, Labour and Capital Taxation...."
- Next in thread: Igor: "Re: Land, Labour and Capital Taxation...."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
