Re: 'Waterhole' and land rents
- From: royls@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 09:46:45 GMT
On 18 Jan 2007 21:30:22 -0800, w_b_ryan@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
"So, when this guy charges people to drink the
water, how much is (taxable) rent and how much
belongs to the guy?"
---------------------------------------------
Your demarcation is nonsensical. The point is that
there is an actual income flow that can be taxed.
No, the point is that your implicit assumption that only flows can
rightly be taxed is flat wrong.
Whether it should be taxed and how much of it
should be taxed away is an entirely separate
question. The water is there because there has been
discovery and development.
No, the water was there before. It's just that no one could use it.
If you tax away too
much of the income, or if you expropriate it away,
you eliminate the incentive to discover and develop.
Even with the incentive, many fail. But the fact that
some succeed benefits us all.
Discovery is great stuff. So is development, most of the time. The
problem is with the third "D": depriving others of what they would
otherwise have been able to use, without compensating them for the
loss.
-- Roy L
.
- References:
- 'Waterhole' and land rents
- From: Dan in Philly
- Re: 'Waterhole' and land rents
- From: w_b_ryan
- 'Waterhole' and land rents
- Prev by Date: Re: 'Waterhole' and land rents
- Next by Date: Re: 'Waterhole' and land rents
- Previous by thread: Re: 'Waterhole' and land rents
- Next by thread: Re: 'Waterhole' and land rents
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|