Would taxing property values be fairer than the Council Tax?

CLAPTON

rash161 wrote: »

Because it's a class war


That reminds me, I forgot your previous post...



"From each according to his ability" means that each person just does what they can. It doesn't mean that money/resources will be stolen from everyone at the point of a gun, that's what tax is.

The key part is:
"To each according to his need"

Need, not "want".

How do you possibly justify using the internet : clearly a 'want' and not a 'need'.

rash161

CLAPTON wrote: »

How do you possibly justify using the internet : clearly a 'want' and not a 'need'.

Education.

CLAPTON

rash161 wrote: »

Education.

only a 'want' not a 'need'
but clearly in Marx scheme of things, some people would naturally have more 'needs' than others : like Marx himself

rash161

CLAPTON wrote: »

only a 'want' not a 'need'
but clearly in Marx scheme of things, some people would naturally have more 'needs' than others : like Marx himself

I'm fed up of people like you and your weak argument of "well you're on the Internet, end of discussion".

Go get drunk or something and further reduce your intelligence

antrobus

rash161 wrote: »

Because it's a class war

Curious though, how the threat of nuclear armageddon has receded now that certain nations have abandoned left-wing idealogies.

rash161 wrote: »

..."From each according to his ability" means that each person just does what they can. It doesn't mean that money/resources will be stolen from everyone at the point of a gun, that's what tax is.

That interpretation only applies in the "higher phase of communist society"; only then can "society inscribe" the words on their "banners". In the meantime it means paying tax. Your radical idea that you have the choice to somehow absolve yourself contributing to society is a dangerous notion. At best you are likely to find yourself transported to some labour camp in an inhospitable part of the country for a number of years; at worst you will be shot.

rash161 wrote: »

...
The key part is:
"To each according to his need"

Need, not "want".

You will discover that people disagree on the distinction between needs and wants. For example, what you want, and what I think you need, may well be very different.

rash161

antrobus wrote: »

Curious though, how the threat of nuclear armageddon has receded now that certain nations have abandoned left-wing idealogies.

There's never been a Communist nation, only fascist ones.

antrobus

chewmylegoff wrote: »

.... There has to be some way of charging people for local services, a property tax seems a reasonable proxy in a society which seems to generally accept that "the rich" should pay more. People didn't seem to like each individual being individually charged for some reason...

Faced with the problem of how to fund basic local services, most countries seem to have adopted a property tax as a solution. It has the merit that it is easy to identify in which locality a property is situated and is thereore benefiting from the services, whilst the income generated is stable and predictable.

chewmylegoff wrote: »

....
But... we already have a property tax based on value. As PN says, it could just do with a couple more bands such on top.

Indeed we do. At some point in the future some government will simply have to bite the bullet and have a revaluation. (They managed to do one in Wales without inspriring revolution.) Presumably adding a couple of bands at the same time might well generate an extra billion or two overall, which could be used to soften the impact elsewhere.

antrobus

rash161 wrote: »

There's never been a Communist nation, only fascist ones.

The Soviet Union was a fascist state? Cuba is a fascist state?

Curious and curiouser.

rash161

antrobus wrote: »

The Soviet Union was a fascist state? Cuba is a fascist state?

Curious and curiouser.

Yes...especially the Soviet Union, how can you not see that?

In Communism, there is no government, both of those states have/had governments?

CKhalvashi

rash161 wrote: »

Yes...especially the Soviet Union, how can you not see that?

In Communism, there is no government, both of those states have/had governments?

I'm Soviet-born, and there was a government.

I was young in the days of Gorbachev and it wasn't bad at all; IMO, he did a better job than the current Russian leadership.

In Georgia (the part of the USSR I'm from), everyone has tried to do a good job, but being faced with huge debts from the collapse of the USSR, three wars and nearly 10% of the country internally displaced, there are still many challenges.

In other words, whilst capitalism is largely a good thing, the challenges to get there has been (and probably will be another 20 years) extremely hard.