I'm American and I really hope you guys get the LVT. It would make Britain boom and NOT bust and maybe some of us across the Atlantic will have a much easier time getting it implemented into our own states. YOU BETTER GET WORKING ON THIS! We're in this together!
No, you won't. Land Value Tax is the only thing within the political system that will not favor the rich and powerful at cost of the landless peasants. Which is why we'll never get it to pass and most politicians, here or on your side of the Atlantic, don't open their mouths about it.
Bravo! Bravo! We remove ALL taxes and collect 100% of the rental value of Land and return 100% of the rental value of Land back to every man, woman and child equally. This ensures that EVERYONE receives a Land Dividend that exactly equals the Land rent on the average piece of Land . This effectively places the monetary system within the boundaries of Life which ensures equal Freedom to ALL. Bravo! Bravo!
Bravo! Bravo! We remove ALL taxes and collect 100% of the rental value of Land and return 100% of the rental value of Land back to every man, woman and child equally. This ensures that EVERYONE receives a Land Dividend that exactly equals the Land rent on the average piece of Land . This effectively places the monetary system within the boundaries of Life. Bravo! Bravo!
Bravo! Bravo! We collect 100% of the rental value of Land and return 100% of the rental value of Land back to every man, woman and child equally. This ensures that EVERYONE receives a Land Dividend that exactly equals the Land rent on the average piece of Land . This effectively places the monetary system within the boundaries of Life. Bravo! Bravo!
8. With LVT, land owners are unable to pass the tax to their tenant renters, due to competition for land use.
9. After LVT is introduced, speculators in land values will want to foreclose on mortgages and withdraw money for re-investment. LVT should be introduced gradually, allowing investors time to transfer money to company-shares, where the expansion will meet the increased demand for produce (see below).
10. With LVT, there is incentive to use land for production, rather than it lying idle or being partly used.
11. With LVT, greater working opportunities exist due to cheaper land and a greater number of available sites. Consumer goods become cheaper since entrepreneurs have less difficulty in starting-up and running their businesses. Demand grows, unemployment decreases.
12. As LVT is introduced, investment is withdrawn from land and placed in durable capital goods.
13. The collection of taxes from productive effort and commerce is socially unjust. LVT replaces this extortion by gathering the surplus rental income which comes without exertion. It is a natural system of money-gathering.
14. Bribery and corruption cease with LVT. Before, this was due to the leaking of news of municipal plans for housing development.
It's a shame that only 290 people have seen this clip here (at most as multiple viewings by the same person are counted) . Maybe a few hundred thousand saw the original segment on daytime tv (I didn't). Even fewer paid attention, less understood or got the point, many are instantly and unthinkingly against the idea as soon as the Tories say that it as a new tax. LVT's profile is still woefully low. Mass comprehension seems even more distant.
As a community development professional here in the United States I have long recognized the important contribution of a near-100 percent tax on the annual rental value of locations (i.e., land parcles) to sustainable development. As Mr. Wetzel observes, by increasing the annual cost of holding land off the market land speculation is curtailed. Simultaneously reducing (or eliminating) that portion of property taxation falling on buildings encourages both renovation and new construction.
"Simultaneously reducing (or eliminating) that portion of property taxation falling on buildings encourages both renovation and new construction."
This occurred in Harrisburg where vacant lots/derelict buildings were cleared up and not left to rot as the landowner left the plot/building, as the land under gained in value over time. He made money, tax free, by doing NOTHING and leaving an ugly eyesore building/plot for the community to look at and taken from use by the community
Dave Wetzel is right. Yes, the Institute of Fiscal Studies came down in favor of Land Valuation Taxation. Winston CHurchill was a great gan and tried to get it introduced with offices set up, as was Tolstoy, Einstein, etc.
Farmers should NOT be exempt, no more than any factory in a city - they will not pay income tax, etc. ALL land must be taxed. There can be exemptions. Winston Churchill called the old person in an house, the "Old Widow Bogey", which has been repeatedly denounced.
Why has LVT's time come. Well for all sorts of reasons, the current crisis of course, but also for practical reasons too. We now have the computing power and the GPS mapping tools to really make it work.
Oh, by the way (see my 2nd comment below). LVT will capture developers windfall profits for the community, it will do it in an altogether more subtle, sustainable, administratively straightforward and socially positive way.
Towards the end of this it really sounds like the Tory, who has perhaps only reacted to this idea on instinct before, is beginning to realise that LVT is a serious contender. He even seems surprised at the distinction drawn between development value and tax on the rental value which is what LVT is.
It's true that Labour has in the past tried to introduce taxes on development windfalls profits, in an, on their part, knee-jerk and poorly thought out unwise and misguided attempt to capture the huge profits of land speculators for the community. LVT is an old idea whose time has come.
Labour introduced the Betterment Act, which taxed land once Planning Permission was granted. It never worked as land owners would not develop land as they were taxed immediately.
Full LVT, the SINGLE TAX, is by far the best and should have been introduced by Labour. The LIberals tried in 1909. The House of Lords stopped them, cause a major constitutional crisis. The only war Winston Churchill lost to the British landowners
Hong Kong use LVT and have low income tax and corporation tax, hence making an enterprise driven society - introduced by the British who could not introduce it in the UK because of powerful landed vested interests.
Income Tax was a temporary tax to fund the Napoleonic wars. The landed gentry (Tories) saw the opportunity to push taxation from their land, land was taxed then, to the poor's income. Bit by bit taxation was moved away from land, which in the Middle Ages accounted for all taxation.
Labour's previous reluctance to fully embrace it stems from the fact that the idea actually has right wing libertarian roots and indeed still has support in those circles. Basically the libertarians would introduce LVT and abolish ALL other taxes, theres a spectrum. I have to assume that even Labour can now see the case for LVT replacing rates, stamp duty, VAT, perhaps NI. The Lib dems would have it replace much of income tax eventually (hence, first shot, their no tax on first £10k policy).
These comments (in FT (11/10/11, link won't post, google, tory MP, Career Suicide, Land Tax) show Tory kneejerk reaction to LVT. They have never really considered it and reject in on tribal grounds. Pritchards comments (a Tory 1922 committe member) in the FT article) show he either doesn't understand LVT or is instictively rejecting it on tribal grounds, probably the former caused by the latter.
At last. It doesn't seem to like things that look like web addresses. so here goes. I also like a website called positive money , one word, it's an org in the uk.
The interviewer did her homework on this. This was an excellent initial dialog, with several points of agreement. It seems to me the next step would be a thorough study of how the LVT would work throughout UK, maybe starting in London. We need to know who would pay more, who less. Also a proposal for amount of exemption for residences and farmers. Often farmers support LVT because it maintains land price affordability for entry level farmers as well as reduces taxes on earned income.
The interviewer did her homework on this. This was an excellent initial dialog, with several points of agreement. It seems to me the next step would be a thorough study of how the LVT would work throughout UK, maybe starting in London. We need to know who would pay more, who less. Also a proposal for amount of exemption for residences and farmers. Often farmers support LVT because it maintains land price affordability for entry level working as well as reduces taxes on earned income.
I'm American and I really hope you guys get the LVT. It would make Britain boom and NOT bust and maybe some of us across the Atlantic will have a much easier time getting it implemented into our own states. YOU BETTER GET WORKING ON THIS! We're in this together!
ihatemoses 2 months ago
@ihatemoses
No, you won't. Land Value Tax is the only thing within the political system that will not favor the rich and powerful at cost of the landless peasants. Which is why we'll never get it to pass and most politicians, here or on your side of the Atlantic, don't open their mouths about it.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
Bravo! Bravo! We remove ALL taxes and collect 100% of the rental value of Land and return 100% of the rental value of Land back to every man, woman and child equally. This ensures that EVERYONE receives a Land Dividend that exactly equals the Land rent on the average piece of Land . This effectively places the monetary system within the boundaries of Life which ensures equal Freedom to ALL. Bravo! Bravo!
EdiblePlanet 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Bravo! Bravo! We remove ALL taxes and collect 100% of the rental value of Land and return 100% of the rental value of Land back to every man, woman and child equally. This ensures that EVERYONE receives a Land Dividend that exactly equals the Land rent on the average piece of Land . This effectively places the monetary system within the boundaries of Life. Bravo! Bravo!
EdiblePlanet 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Bravo! Bravo! We collect 100% of the rental value of Land and return 100% of the rental value of Land back to every man, woman and child equally. This ensures that EVERYONE receives a Land Dividend that exactly equals the Land rent on the average piece of Land . This effectively places the monetary system within the boundaries of Life. Bravo! Bravo!
EdiblePlanet 3 months ago
There are 14 ASPECTS OF LAND-VALUE TAXATION (not the 3 on the video clip)
3 GOVERNMENT
1. LVT, adds to the national income.
2. The collection cost of LVT is much less than on other kinds of production-based tax.
3. With LVT, the national economy stabilizes. It ceases to have the 18 year housing boom and bust cycle.
LAND OWNERS
4. LVT is progressive, owners pay tax in proportion to the site value.
Macrocompassion 4 months ago 2
5. Owners pay LVT regardless of how the land is used. When it is leased to tenants some or most of the resulting ground-rent is the tax.
6. LVT stops speculation in land prices. Withholding land from proper use is too costly.
7. The introduction of LVT reduces the sales price of sites, although their value (potential usefulness) may continue to grow.
Macrocompassion 4 months ago
8. With LVT, land owners are unable to pass the tax to their tenant renters, due to competition for land use.
9. After LVT is introduced, speculators in land values will want to foreclose on mortgages and withdraw money for re-investment. LVT should be introduced gradually, allowing investors time to transfer money to company-shares, where the expansion will meet the increased demand for produce (see below).
3 COMMUNITY
Macrocompassion 4 months ago
10. With LVT, there is incentive to use land for production, rather than it lying idle or being partly used.
11. With LVT, greater working opportunities exist due to cheaper land and a greater number of available sites. Consumer goods become cheaper since entrepreneurs have less difficulty in starting-up and running their businesses. Demand grows, unemployment decreases.
12. As LVT is introduced, investment is withdrawn from land and placed in durable capital goods.
Macrocompassion 4 months ago
ETHICS
13. The collection of taxes from productive effort and commerce is socially unjust. LVT replaces this extortion by gathering the surplus rental income which comes without exertion. It is a natural system of money-gathering.
14. Bribery and corruption cease with LVT. Before, this was due to the leaking of news of municipal plans for housing development.
Macrocompassion 4 months ago
It's a shame that only 290 people have seen this clip here (at most as multiple viewings by the same person are counted) . Maybe a few hundred thousand saw the original segment on daytime tv (I didn't). Even fewer paid attention, less understood or got the point, many are instantly and unthinkingly against the idea as soon as the Tories say that it as a new tax. LVT's profile is still woefully low. Mass comprehension seems even more distant.
androo235 4 months ago
As a community development professional here in the United States I have long recognized the important contribution of a near-100 percent tax on the annual rental value of locations (i.e., land parcles) to sustainable development. As Mr. Wetzel observes, by increasing the annual cost of holding land off the market land speculation is curtailed. Simultaneously reducing (or eliminating) that portion of property taxation falling on buildings encourages both renovation and new construction.
nthperson 4 months ago
@nthperson
"Simultaneously reducing (or eliminating) that portion of property taxation falling on buildings encourages both renovation and new construction."
This occurred in Harrisburg where vacant lots/derelict buildings were cleared up and not left to rot as the landowner left the plot/building, as the land under gained in value over time. He made money, tax free, by doing NOTHING and leaving an ugly eyesore building/plot for the community to look at and taken from use by the community
NearAbbeyRoad 4 months ago
The biggest proponent of LVT was American Henry George, who is virtually cult status in the USA.
People do not argue with the teachings of
Henry George; they simply do not know it. He who
becomes acquainted with it cannot but agree.
- Count Leo Tolstoy
NearAbbeyRoad 4 months ago
Dave Wetzel is right. Yes, the Institute of Fiscal Studies came down in favor of Land Valuation Taxation. Winston CHurchill was a great gan and tried to get it introduced with offices set up, as was Tolstoy, Einstein, etc.
NearAbbeyRoad 4 months ago
LVT has a massive following in the USA
NearAbbeyRoad 4 months ago
Farmers should NOT be exempt, no more than any factory in a city - they will not pay income tax, etc. ALL land must be taxed. There can be exemptions. Winston Churchill called the old person in an house, the "Old Widow Bogey", which has been repeatedly denounced.
NearAbbeyRoad 4 months ago
LVT is not a socialist idea. The biggest pushers of LVT are the LibDems.
Wetzel was right the Labour government do not try LVT.
This Falon is an idiot! LVT is not another tax, it is the SINGLE TAX, it gets rid of the lot except one, LVT. LVT is foolproof.
Landed people support the Tories, hence why they are against LVT.
LVT stops boom & busts. The 1929 & 2008 crashes were because money was poured into LAND.
NearAbbeyRoad 4 months ago
Why has LVT's time come. Well for all sorts of reasons, the current crisis of course, but also for practical reasons too. We now have the computing power and the GPS mapping tools to really make it work.
androo235 4 months ago
Oh, by the way (see my 2nd comment below). LVT will capture developers windfall profits for the community, it will do it in an altogether more subtle, sustainable, administratively straightforward and socially positive way.
androo235 4 months ago
Towards the end of this it really sounds like the Tory, who has perhaps only reacted to this idea on instinct before, is beginning to realise that LVT is a serious contender. He even seems surprised at the distinction drawn between development value and tax on the rental value which is what LVT is.
androo235 4 months ago
It's true that Labour has in the past tried to introduce taxes on development windfalls profits, in an, on their part, knee-jerk and poorly thought out unwise and misguided attempt to capture the huge profits of land speculators for the community. LVT is an old idea whose time has come.
androo235 4 months ago
@androo235
Labour introduced the Betterment Act, which taxed land once Planning Permission was granted. It never worked as land owners would not develop land as they were taxed immediately.
Full LVT, the SINGLE TAX, is by far the best and should have been introduced by Labour. The LIberals tried in 1909. The House of Lords stopped them, cause a major constitutional crisis. The only war Winston Churchill lost to the British landowners
NearAbbeyRoad 4 months ago
Hong Kong use LVT and have low income tax and corporation tax, hence making an enterprise driven society - introduced by the British who could not introduce it in the UK because of powerful landed vested interests.
Income Tax was a temporary tax to fund the Napoleonic wars. The landed gentry (Tories) saw the opportunity to push taxation from their land, land was taxed then, to the poor's income. Bit by bit taxation was moved away from land, which in the Middle Ages accounted for all taxation.
NearAbbeyRoad 4 months ago
Labour's previous reluctance to fully embrace it stems from the fact that the idea actually has right wing libertarian roots and indeed still has support in those circles. Basically the libertarians would introduce LVT and abolish ALL other taxes, theres a spectrum. I have to assume that even Labour can now see the case for LVT replacing rates, stamp duty, VAT, perhaps NI. The Lib dems would have it replace much of income tax eventually (hence, first shot, their no tax on first £10k policy).
androo235 4 months ago
@androo235
LVT does not have right-wing Liberation roots. Adam Smith and David Ricado supported it. LVT fits into any ism
"George's blend of radicalism and conservatism can puzzle one,
until it is seen as a reconciliation of the two. The system is internally
consistent, but defies conventional stereotypes."
- Professor Mason Gaffney (US economist)
NearAbbeyRoad 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
These comments (in FT (11/10/11, link won't post, google, tory MP, Career Suicide, Land Tax) show Tory kneejerk reaction to LVT. They have never really considered it and reject in on tribal grounds. Pritchards comments (a Tory 1922 committe member) in the FT article) show he either doesn't understand LVT or is instictively rejecting it on tribal grounds, probably the former caused by the latter.
androo235 4 months ago
I'm going to try putting back the punctuation. (Are brackets ok?)
androo235 4 months ago
At last. It doesn't seem to like things that look like web addresses. so here goes. I also like a website called positive money , one word, it's an org in the uk.
androo235 4 months ago
Comment removed
androo235 4 months ago
This is posted from notepad, let's see if it works. Is there a character limit. what is it. Let's add a comma, lets add some numbers 11/10/11.
androo235 4 months ago
Comment removed
androo235 4 months ago
Comment removed
androo235 4 months ago
Comment removed
androo235 4 months ago
OK that worked, lets try and post what I want to post.
androo235 4 months ago
I am trying to post a comment to this but seem to be unable too.
androo235 4 months ago
Comment removed
androo235 4 months ago
Comment removed
androo235 4 months ago
The interviewer did her homework on this. This was an excellent initial dialog, with several points of agreement. It seems to me the next step would be a thorough study of how the LVT would work throughout UK, maybe starting in London. We need to know who would pay more, who less. Also a proposal for amount of exemption for residences and farmers. Often farmers support LVT because it maintains land price affordability for entry level farmers as well as reduces taxes on earned income.
AlannaHartzok 4 months ago
The interviewer did her homework on this. This was an excellent initial dialog, with several points of agreement. It seems to me the next step would be a thorough study of how the LVT would work throughout UK, maybe starting in London. We need to know who would pay more, who less. Also a proposal for amount of exemption for residences and farmers. Often farmers support LVT because it maintains land price affordability for entry level working as well as reduces taxes on earned income.
AlannaHartzok 4 months ago
A Tory arguing against reducing tax avoidance. No surprise there
nealeu 5 months ago