Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 164 posts

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#151

Post by iteratethis »

strangesmells06 wrote: post #93
spaceman_2020 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Capitalist societies across the world are in complete demographic collapse because young people can’t afford homes to raise families, and yet progressive land taxation remains an unpopular idea. Absurd.

I find it absurd that the government can come take the house of a 70-year-old whose retired and cant keep up with the property tax skyrocketing around them. I find it absurd that rich people can move to an area they like and displace all the families that have been there generations by virtue of property tax increases effectively conquering the land. I find it absurd that the government can take your home AT ALL afte…

For what it's worth: I'm from the Netherlands, generally considered a very high tax country. I've only recently learned about US property taxes and I'm shocked.

We too have such a thing, in a much more complicated way, but it's a mere fraction of what you pay.

On average, a dutch household that owns a home pays 851€ per year in municipality taxes, which includes property tax, waste/garbage services and sewage rights. Pure property tax may be as low as 50€ per month.

The idea behind it is very simple: you can't eat a home. A home you occupy does not generate any immediate income. Further, a home owner has little influence on the value of its property. When it rises in value that might be great, but your income, whichever it is, does not rise along with it. Finally, one can effectively never retire in their own bloody home with such a scheme.

Property tax is deeply unethical and cruel. Astonishing how the ultimate capitalist country allows for it.

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#152

Post by defrost »

iteratethis wrote: post #149
jacknews wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about people who can't afford to buy? Their taxes subsidize those who can. Ultimately, land itself is like air and water, it is a birth-right.

People that can't afford things tend to pay little tax, if any. They are net receivers. And how are people that bought something with their own money subsidized? Owning land is not a birth right.

How much land ownership is generational though?

What percentage is passed on as a birth right?

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#153

Post by Obscurity4340 »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #141
Obscurity4340 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> other reasons What might those be? Can you expand on why you don't "like" it...

1. The whole thing has a "one weird trick to fix your economy" vibe to it. On that ground alone, it feels like snake oil. (If you want to argue that "vibe" is not an intellectually rigorous criticism, I will admit the truth of that point.) 2. Why land, specifically? Why land only ? It's not the 1800s anymore, and land is not either the primary asset or the primary source of wealth. Why single it out as the thing to t…

Re:1 - a lot of abstraction here to simply say this is merely your conjecture. Just cuz it sounds like a meme doesn't mean its not totally on the money, so to speak. Sometimes art really does imitate life and vice versa

Also: There's this one annoying trick where "they" (the rich) constantly get whatever they want whenever the thought pops up and thats normal but any small step taken to roll back the trend and that is often popular or at least a cult-fave is radical and insane.

Edit: Family Guy already did this and they did it the best (frivolous difference in belief or opinion -> This man is insane -> custody -> comedy)

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#154

Post by strangesmells06 »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #135
strangesmells06 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you seem to not understand is that the government has enough money to maintain the roads with out property tax entirely. It would force the government to be more efficient with their money and shrink the governement to just the essentials. You think any for of US government operates on a shoestring budget? They are the most bloated entities on the earth. And its based off the backs of the poor and middle class.

City governments certainly do not have enough money.

They absolutely do, but they spend it on other things.

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#155

Post by jacknews »

iteratethis wrote: post #149
jacknews wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about people who can't afford to buy? Their taxes subsidize those who can. Ultimately, land itself is like air and water, it is a birth-right.

People that can't afford things tend to pay little tax, if any. They are net receivers. And how are people that bought something with their own money subsidized? Owning land is not a birth right.

Indeed, actually owning land rather than leasing perhaps should not be a right of private entities at all.

But a place to live is obviously a requirement of existence, and therefore must be a right.

As for 'own money' etc, it isn't god-given out of thin air, but results from our current system of organizing work and distributing rewards. Some would say that system is unfair, even rigged.

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#156

Post by robertlagrant »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #143
Obscurity4340 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re:2: Why should LABOUR in lieu of land be taxed? What's more Adam-and-Evey than making everyone suffer under the sweat of their brows for the rest of the days or tax the fewer far better resourced landowners and everyone lives happily ever after

How about we don't pick one thing? How about we pick income, including capital gains, and land, and buildings, and IP? And maybe set the rates low enough that nobody gets crushed?

> How about we pick income, including capital gains, and land, and buildings, and IP?

Only one of those is income.

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#157

Post by bryanlarsen »

strangesmells06 wrote: post #154
bryanlarsen wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

City governments certainly do not have enough money.

They absolutely do, but they spend it on other things.

Like what? The majority of the budget is roads, water & police.

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#158

Post by Obscurity4340 »

Obscurity4340 wrote: post #144
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about we don't pick one thing? How about we pick income, including capital gains, and land, and buildings, and IP? And maybe set the rates low enough that nobody gets crushed?

Some would argue you're describing the status quo, which is crushing young people and the disadvantaged. How 'bout making capital gains equivalent to laboearned income?

That won't happen because capital gains and tax-free selling of real estate is the source of the power and inequality. Might as well demand reps sign their own economic death warrant or at least their own demotion to regular plebian socioeconomic class who needs to actually earn and be big boy taxed on their earnings to cover "their share" and attitudes towards how they are able and also required to spend their time

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#159

Post by Obscurity4340 »

PopAlongKid wrote: post #66
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe. But maybe California's government has given more reason than other governments to think that they would treat this as an additional form of income, rather than a replacement.

That's an interesting claim that calls out for more evidence. Just a year ago, when CA had a large budget surplus, it refunded billions of dollars to many of its taxpaying residents in the form of inflation relief payments. That doesn't seem like the behavior of a government that only wants to collect more and more tax.

Is there any objective and reasonable discussion on the state of CA's finances? Its like the 8th largest economy in the world or something and all I ever hear is right-wing invective about how its a "Failing State" and bankrupt etc. Come to think of it, it seems to mirror the discussion at the Federal level where all I hear the right bitch about is "deficits and interest", which never seems to come up come tax discussion time where they are all too happy to widen said concerning gulf...

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#160

Post by rindalir »

dfxm12 wrote: post #73
rindalir wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you own a farm in a city or area with high housing demand, yes, I think it would. (edit: and I'm not meaning this to be a sarcastic response -- there are urban farms).

What makes you think this is unfair specifically to an urban farm? What about an LVT treats this urban farm differently from a parking lot or totally undeveloped lot?

Oh my brain edited out the "unfair" part in the original question, I assumed it was just asking about higher value/tax. I think that an urban farm, baring some very extenuating circumstance, is an enormous waste of space. And I'm a part-time (non-urban) farmer.
Post reply on HN