Re: Relative poverty, a problem?

On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 16:25:57 -0400, Nospam <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

royls@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

IME such "fundamentalism" is quite rare among those who are commonly
termed Georgists,

Well, you are one of those that advocated and debated with me some time ago
the idea of REMOVING ALL THE OTHER TAXES and replacing them with LVT alone.

No, I said we should remove all the current unfair, inefficient and
economically destructive taxes like income tax, and replace them with
taxes on economic rents.

So yes, you are one of those I call fundamentalists :-)

Name calling being your substitute for facts and logic.

by LVT opponents. Obviously the 19th C claims of the Single Tax
heralding the Kingdom of God on earth were overdone. Nobody today
seriously claims LVT will solve all problems, nor even all economic
problems.

Well, you did some time ago. Or at least from what you said you let me the
idea that this is what you advocate.

No.

I remember quite well your opposition to tax the income of the Wall Street
traders because it is a tax on income.

That's right. You need to get straight that there is a difference
between earned income and economic rent, and it is not a matter of
size.

And we have already shown you that farming would
bear a SMALLER tax burden under LVT.

No, actually you failed to show me exactly that point.

No, I proved it. You just didn't understand the proof because you
don't know any economics. LVT would reduce the tax burden on farming
because it would end the taxation of the farmer's inputs and
production, and would only recover what the farmer would otherwise be
paying to the landowner for doing nothing.

I even gave you a
numeric example to show you that removing income taxation and replace them
with LVT will generate skyrocketing food prices.

Uh, no, if you will recall, I proved that example was utter nonsense,
and demolished it.

You replied with (mostly)
PR but never with a clear numeric example to show that it can be done.

Garbage. It has been known for nearly 200 years, and is not seriously
disputed by any competent economist, that a tax on land rent cannot,
repeat, CANNOT be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices.
It is just not konwn by you, because you do not know any economics.

If however, the LVT is used as a nonexclusive taxation used to reduce income
taxes for low income families, but not to replace all the income taxation,
well that it is an idea I can agree with.

Why do you insist that moderate and high incomes be taxed? Why should
the most productive be punished for producing more than others?

You apparently can't get your
head around the fact that LVT taxes land by its VALUE, not its AREA.

And I told you that exactly as today, many find taxshelters to reduce income
taxation into a Georgist situation the wealthy corporations can just do
that without breaking the law.

No, they can't. A tax on land rent cannot be shifted off the
landowner. Period.

The simplest example I gave was with offshoring. A company headquartered in
US pays the same tax on income regardless if the manufacturing facility is
in Manhattan, in Utah plains or in China.

No, they do not, because it is easy to manipulate the accounts to show
no income when the Chinese operation is a black box.

If you eliminate all the taxation
and replace them with LVT, then if the company drop the Manhattan plant and
move it in China will pay NO LVT.

Well, if they are not operating (using land) in the USA, why would you
imagine that they should pay taxes to the US government? In any case,
the burden of LVT is borne exclusively by the land's owner at the time
the LVT is implemented. If the company owns land in the USA, then
decides to move to China "to avoid the LVT," it will simply pay all
the LVT _in_advance_ when it sells the land and moves to China.

Well, in today's world the company can also move the headquarter in Dubai
like Haliburton then pay no taxes at all.

No _income_ taxes. That is kinda the point.

But LVT will not help in that
case either.

I have already explained why it will. Haliburton and all other
companies will be unable to avoid paying the LVT on all US land they
own when it is implemented.

Only VAT can tax offshore companies selling goods and services
in US and due to offshoring issue, I see VAT as a requirement.

Why would you imagine the USA should tax offshore companies selling to
the USA, except to the extent that those companies benefit by using US
resources? VAT is one of the worst taxes ever devised, as it
specifically punishes creation of value.

-- Roy L
.

Relevant Pages

  • illegal alien kills another american
    ... Somebody living on a million dollars a year but earning five million after taxes, can sock away four million in a Swiss bank. ... If his taxes go up enough to drop his after-tax income to only three million a year, heâ??s still living on a million a year, and only socks away two million in the Swiss bank. ... The Rich Person Tax Effect is the one that virtually all Americans understand - and, oddly, most working class people think applies to them, too. ... The top tax rate that a person pays is referred to as their marginal tax rate. ...
    (misc.transport.trucking)
  • Re: Fairtax: how does this math work out?
    ... As> I understand it, they want to get rid of the income tax altogether, and> raise the sales tax on items to 23%. ... They argue that low income, medium income, and high> income families will all benefit from lower taxation, while the> government will be able to increase the revenue it brings in from> taxation. ... If he doesn't pay that income tax, but instead goes broke by spending every single penny of that 30 million in the economy, he would still end up contributing 5.3 million dollars less to the government than he would under the income tax system. ... The answer is that it would appear that the wealthy would pay less than they do now in taxes. ...
    (misc.taxes)
  • Re: Who Really Owns the Roads?
    ... And his fund is based out side the US so he doesn't have to pay the tax ... Caribbean lets foreign investors pay no US taxes. ... would be bad for the economy. ... The obvious answer would be that if he's not paying US income tax there ...
    (misc.transport.road)
  • Re: Relative poverty, a problem?
    ... the idea of REMOVING ALL THE OTHER TAXES and replacing them with LVT alone. ... Social Security income that I have earned by virtue of PAYING out ... that FICA tax all of my life. ... In a system of land rent redistribution I will ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Plan for America
    ... "Fellowships" and other forms of indirect sponsorship of right-wing talk show hosts have made otherwise-marginal shows and their hosts ubiquitous, and such sponsorships of groups like Norquist's anti-tax "Americans for Tax Reform" regularly get people like him front-and-center in any debate on taxation in the United States. ... All of this money was spent - invested, really, since it's been more than saved back in low income tax rates on millionaires and billionaires - to convince Americans that up is down and black is white when it comes to income taxes. ... The top tax rate that a person pays is referred to as their ...
    (misc.transport.trucking)
Loading