Re: query regarding Georgist assertion

On 6 Apr 2007 01:10:16 -0700, w_b_ryan@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

On Apr 6, 1:16 am, r...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 5 Apr 2007 16:17:12 -0700, w_b_r...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

The link you supplied does not support the assertion
that "high" taxes on land are associated with
prosperity. Eighteen countries are listed, all
European, with the exception of the United States,
Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and Japan. The
countries are ranked from the highest to the lowest
in terms of "property tax as a percentage of total tax
collected by the country." The United States is
ranked the highest at 11.9 percent. Austria is
ranked the lowest at 1.3 percent. That is to say,
more than ninety percent of taxes collected in those
very wealthy industrialized countries come from
something other than property tax. Inasmuch as
property tax is inclusive of tax on improvements
and personal property, the percentage of total taxes
collected on the value of land alone would be even
lower.

Of course they are not Single Tax countries. The point is to compare
the ones near the top of the list with the ones near the bottom. The
ones near the top -- USA, Switzerland, Japan, Canada, Australia --
have generally been more prosperous than those near the bottom. The
UK is less prosperous despite its high property tax revenue fraction
becuase its property tax system is very strongly geared to taxing
improvements at a higher rate than land.

I notice you ignored all the other evidence I provided of pre-modern
examples and the newly prosperous resource-rent countries. That is
normal and expected.

But it's really very simple, stupid: would Kuwait, Brunei, etc. be
wealthy countries today if they were giving all the economic rent of
their resources away to the oil companies for doing nothing, and
taxing production to raise revenue?

You have of course chosen to be permanently incapable of answering
that question honestly, or even of knowing the answer, because it
proves your beliefs are false.
-------------------------------------------

This was the Georgist assertion that I asked for
some verifiable data in support:

"...the most prosperous societies usually have high
levels of land taxation."

You supplied a link to data from eighteen countries,
which demonstrated that more than ninety percent
of taxes in those countries were from sources other
than taxes on property of all kinds, and that the
percentage of taxes from land, being a subset of
property of all kinds, would be necessarily lower.

Not really. Some fraction of many other taxes -- income taxes,
corporate profits taxes, and especially capital gains taxes --
consists of land rent, which is one reason such taxes are not as
damaging as economic theory would otherwise predict.

You now say "the point is to compare the ones near
the top of the list with the ones near the bottom."

No, that is not responsive to my request.

Yes, of course it is. The only possible meaning of "high levels of
land taxation" is "high levels of land taxation compared to the levels
typically observed." What else could it mean?

Rather
than demonstrate that the most prosperous societies
usually have high levels of land taxation, the data
actually demonstrates that the eighteen very
prosperous countries have low levels of land
taxation.

No, of course it doesn't. The 18 countries range from almost
nonexistent to high levels of land taxation (though admittedly none
are anywhere near as high as the highest levels ever, where the true
miracles of economic growth have occurred), and the most prosperous
ones were on the high end. In particular, comparing otherwise similar
countries from the high and low ends of the scale (Austria and
Switzerland, for example) shows that the more prosperous ones have
higher land taxation.

In addition, most of the prosperous countries -- especially Japan, the
USA, UK, etc. -- have historically _become_ prosperous during periods
of relatively high land taxation.

Everything else in your post was additional
assertion without supporting evidence.

?? You need some sort of "supporting evidence" to know that Kuwait
gets almost all its government revenue from its oil resource??

ROTFL!!! Google could help you learn this stuf, Ryan, if you really
_wanted_ to be helped. And until you do, what would be the point of
giving you more supporting evidence? You simply refuse to know all
facts that disprove your false beliefs.

It is impossible to supply actual empirical evidence
to support the Georgist position.

I've supplied lots of it, liar, and so have others. You just refuse
to know all facts that prove your beliefs are false.

-- Roy L
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: query regarding Georgist assertion
    ... prosperity. ... Eighteen countries are listed, all ... more than ninety percent of taxes collected in those ... collected on the value of land alone would be even ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: query regarding Georgist assertion
    ... Eighteen countries are listed, all ... in terms of "property tax as a percentage of total tax ... more than ninety percent of taxes collected in those ... collected on the value of land alone would be even ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: query regarding Georgist assertion
    ... prosperity. ... Eighteen countries are listed, all ... in terms of "property tax as a percentage of total tax ... collected on the value of land alone would be even ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: "Dog-whistle Catholicism"
    ... even read upsetting *headlines* about far-distant foreign lands... ... So, for now, to make our conquest of China humane, we ... countries which recently threatened world peace. ... if they don't have enough land on which to plant enough ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)
  • Re: Buy America?
    ... ANY move on our part to return manufacturing to America will promote retaliation, but the manner of that retaliation is what is at issue. ... If we introduce our 'buy America' by actually not doing anything, but because business made their own decision, it will be far harder for countries to retaliate. ... as there are any number of items or services which already receive favored tax status as compared to other gods and services. ... In point of fact, when the Government reduced taxes in 2001 and 2003, giving domestic companies a break, there was no retaliation, and there will be none now. ...
    (soc.retirement)