Would taxing property values be fairer than the Council Tax?

N1AK

PasturesNew wrote: »

No, what about the person with a modest home that happens to be somewhere that wealthier people suddenly think is "desirable".

Are you opposed to them being allowed to keep the selling price when they sell the place for a huge increase which they did nothing to earn?

N1AK

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

You could live in a family home for over 40 years that you have paid for, paid stamp duty on and have paid years of council tax on simply to mean that you could be forced out of that family home on retirement because your retirement income is not sufficient to maintain the tax on the size of property.


Much better to replace this with a local income tax.

Which to raise the same amount of money would mean you could never have afforded to buy the house in the first place :rotfl:

IveSeenTheLight

N1AK wrote: »

Which to raise the same amount of money would mean you could never have afforded to buy the house in the first place :rotfl:

I think you miss the point.
I am already paying Council tax which is an property tax.
I paid this as an owner and also as a renter.

I was determined to become an owner and put in place the means to achieve that outcome.

Even today, I know many people who even in expensive areas are able to become home owners.

If you have the will, determination and resolve, you can make anything happen.

BillJones

Bantex wrote: »

By "the very rich" I mean those that have very large amounts of wealth. They would tend not to be PAYE employees but usually owners of companies.

So very, very few people, then, maybe three or four families?

I don't think that taxing them more will make much difference to the rates that the rest of us need to pay.

People's definition of "the rich" unfortunately seems to vary based on which point they want to make, so it's hard to follow. The top 1% of earners earn 14% of all income, and pay 30% of all income tax, so obviously this 1% are more than paying their way. If you want to start looking at a small subset of them, though, you rapidly get to such small numbers that the policy there doesn't matter much in terms of revenue.

rash161

antrobus wrote: »

All property is theft.

Why should governments be any different?

Of course it is

Governments steal money from residents of this planet with the threat of violence, they call this tax. That tax money is then used to fund immoral acts, your income tax for example is stolen from you in order to invade other countries and other bully boy acts around the world as well as fund the destruction of the planet with needless chemicals and pollution.

Tax is used for things like licensing as well, I don't want to fund things like alcohol licensing, I don't want any part in the sale of recreational drugs and shouldn't be forced to do so.

N1AK

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

If you have the will, determination and resolve, you can make anything happen.

Then you'd be able to pay a property value tax then and you've just countered your own complaint

N1AK

rash161 wrote: »

Of course it is

Tax is used for things like licensing as well, I don't want to fund things like alcohol licensing, I don't want any part in the sale of recreational drugs and shouldn't be forced to do so.

So you propose a situation where you, and possibly a group of people you agree with on everything, inhabit however much territory and property as you can defend?

I don't want to fund many that the government funds but that's the price of being in a democracy: There will always be some difference between what an individual wants and what the population as a whole wants.

rash161

N1AK wrote: »

So you propose a situation where you, and possibly a group of people you agree with on everything, inhabit however much territory and property as you can defend?

I don't want to fund many that the government funds but that's the price of being in a democracy: There will always be some difference between what an individual wants and what the population as a whole wants.

No

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need

BillJones

rash161 wrote: »

That tax money is then used to fund immoral acts.

And also to fund roads, hospitals, schools, police, science, and so on, and so forth.

Those who like to believe that these evil and immoral organisations exist solely to steal their money do tend to forget that were it not for the state, they'd be reduced to sitting atop their meagre pile of possessions with a pointy stick, desperately hoping that they not fall asleep while the neighbouring gang is still trying to steal them.

I am not sure what kind of society the "tax is theft" people like to imagine they'd have in their libertarian dreams, but I think that it's quite likely that it's be somewhat like Somalia, only less stable and more violent.

rash161

BillJones wrote: »

And also to fund roads, hospitals, schools, police, science, and so on, and so forth.

Those who like to believe that these evil and immoral organisations exist solely to steal their money do tend to forget that were it not for the state, they'd be reduced to sitting atop their meagre pile of possessions with a pointy stick, desperately hoping that they not fall asleep while the neighbouring gang is still trying to steal them.

I am not sure what kind of society the "tax is theft" people like to imagine they'd have in their libertarian dreams, but I think that it's quite likely that it's be somewhat like Somalia, only less stable and more violent.

The only risk to the people comes from the government and their mercenary military/police force. I don't want to receive any services from the government, I don't agree with the lifestyle that those services promote and forcing me to take part in that by funding it is fascism.