Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Micome experiment in Canada in the 1970s

Expand Messages
  • roy_langston
    ... OK, I get how it works. Thanks. ... Presumably these two programs were already in place when you tried to get the LVT bill through, so the tax credit part
    Message 1 of 83 , May 31, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "jdk_maryland_atty" <jdkromkowski@...> wrote:

      > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston" <roy_langston@> wrote:
      > >
      > > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "jdk_maryland_atty" <jdkromkowski@> wrote:
      > >
      > > > Tax credits circumvent (at least in theory because there has never been a direct case on this in MD) the uniformity clause because they are (short version) spending not taxing. So there already is a a "renter's tax credit" in MD, it involves a very complicated formula base on Income (and age, seniors get more) and houselhold size.
      > >
      > > But is it an income tax credit or a property tax credit? If the former, could it be implemented as the latter instead?
      >
      > It's a property tax credit. You get a check as a renter if you qualify. So the renter's property tax credit is more like a means tested CD, but it comes from general revenues.
      >
      > http://www.dat.state.md.us/sdatweb/rtc.html

      OK, I get how it works. Thanks.

      > The Homeowners Property Tax Credit reduces your property tax.
      >
      > >RL: I understand; I'm just wondering what the current state of the exemption/credit art was at the time of your proposal.
      >
      > I don't understand what mean?

      Presumably these two programs were already in place when you tried to get the LVT bill through, so the tax credit part of your proposal probably looked redundant.

      -- Roy Langston
    • roy_langston
      ... No, those consequences result from a misapprehension of the obligation we have to our fellows, which must first be to restore their equal human rights to
      Message 83 of 83 , Jun 3, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, Harry Pollard <harrypollard0@...> wrote:

        > The "we" obligation has led to some bad consequences, including the
        > extensive welfare states that populate a lot of the world.

        No, those consequences result from a misapprehension of the obligation we have to our fellows, which must first be to restore their equal human rights to life, liberty, and property in the fruits of their labor. That can best (maybe only) be accomplished through LVT with a UIE. Then there is the prudent provision of education, and basic and catastrophic health care. Private charity can probably handle the rest.

        > Essentially, a
        > welfare state admits that its economy is unable to attain the real
        > objective - liberty and justice for all - so it goes to extraordinary
        > lengths to patch up its failure with re-distribution of wealth.

        From the productive to the poor's landlords. Right.

        > It fails and in addition there is a theory of history that suggests that
        > the welfare state is the reason why democracies fail. That, as more and
        > more citizens find that taking from the state via the vote is easier, so
        > the number of takers grow even as the producers diminish. Eventually, comes
        > collapse.

        History suggests that it is welfare for the rich -- especially landowners -- that collapses civilizations, not welfare for the poor.

        > In any event, the problems have arisen because "we" feel obligated which
        > is a lot easier to do than feeling "I" am obligated.

        See above. The problems arise because the nature of the obligation is misapprehended.

        > Which is healthier? Governments appropriating other people's money to
        > distribute on pet projects

        "Meeza hatesa gubmint!!"

        > or individuals deciding that someone needs help
        > and proceeding to do something about it?

        As Karl Eskelund's report from Bengal explained, individuals just end up giving to landowners.

        -- Roy Langston
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.