How does this sound for tax policy? Tax on property ownership over X.

John_Pierpoint

Randvegeta wrote: »

Besides, commercial and industrial rents I suppose only indirectly affect consumers. For example, if the rents are expensive, causing goods and services offered by certain companies to be expensive, then the consumer can choose weather or not to buy it. People care about their necessities more, like food, utilities and rent. And companies like Tesco and Sainsbury's already buy cheap land out of the city's, presumably to pass savings onto the consumer?

:wall::wall::wall::wall::wall:

In the words of Ricardo:

"Corn is high, not because rent is paid, but rent is paid because corn is high".

Or, in other, words, prices of commodities are not high because the rents/taxes are high. The correct statement would be that rents/taxes can be high because prices are high. Rent/tax in brief is price determined and not price determining.


This may no longer be completely true because rising population and rising wealth is making it difficult to find enough farm land, and specialising on a particular crop may not be possible, the farmer is being forced to pay rent on land that competes for alternative crops or uses.

We see this with the milk price, where the low price of milk means the dairy farmer cannot compete with a well capitalised grain farmer raising chicken meat in sheds, but milk cannot be transported over large distances from cheap land.

Read all about Ricardo here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ricardo