Re: novel argument against taxing rents
- From: royls@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 12:53:48 GMT
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 00:48:56 -0400, "tonyp" <tonyp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
But seriously: what does it mean for a government to be the "administrator"
but not the "owner" of some land which no private individual owns?
Do you know what a "trust" is? Government decides who will possess
and use the land, and on what terms. It always does. The only
question is, for whose benefit will it do so: all the people, or a
small, wealthy, idle, privileged minority?
If an
earthquake results in a one-acre island rising up in Lake Michigan a
half-mile off Chicago, who owns it?
No one, of course.
Who _can_ own it? Who do we bill the LVT to?
The user, same as any other land.
-- Roy L
.
- References:
- Re: novel argument against taxing rents
- From: Les Cargill
- Re: novel argument against taxing rents
- From: tonyp
- Re: novel argument against taxing rents
- From: royls
- Re: novel argument against taxing rents
- From: tonyp
- Re: novel argument against taxing rents
- From: ruetheday@xxxxxxxxxx
- Re: novel argument against taxing rents
- From: tonyp
- Re: novel argument against taxing rents
- From: ruetheday@xxxxxxxxxx
- Re: novel argument against taxing rents
- From: tonyp
- Re: novel argument against taxing rents
- Prev by Date: Re: novel argument against taxing rents
- Next by Date: Re: novel argument against taxing rents
- Previous by thread: Re: novel argument against taxing rents
- Next by thread: Re: novel argument against taxing rents
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|